Al Gore receives Nobel peace prize

[Fiber]

He got it.

I haven't found an english source yet..

[muck]

I wait for the first people to reply with ":bash::-*$:fork:" - like posts!

[WarriorMonk]

I wait for the first people to reply with ":bash::-*$:fork:" - like posts!

":bash::-*$:fork:"":bash::-*$:fork:"":bash::-*$:fork:"":bash::-*$:fork:"

(just kidding, well, he certainly deserves it for all the work he's done.)

[fish&chips]

Gore and UN panel win Nobel Peace Prize

Climate change campaigner Al Gore and the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have been jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7041082.stm

[pfcsmith1371]

The Nobel peace prize has become a joke. They should hand that prize out to people or organizations that actaully try to make the world a better place, not give to some pompous buffoon who talks about golbal warming all the time.

[name already taken]

The Nobel peace prize has become a joke. They should hand that prize out to people or organizations that actaully try to make the world a better place, not give to some pompous buffoon who talks about golbal warming all the time.
You should've got it !

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/

[Exarecr]

Good grief, what are they putting in their kippers to reach such a dumb conclusion. The only thing he and his climateers did well was dupe the public with shock TV.

[Maktab]

I shouldn't need to point out that this is completely ridiculous. Gore has done nothing to bring peace to any corner of the world, he has resolved no conflicts and built no long-term institutions. Simply put, he has done absolutely nothing that would qualify him for the Peace Prize in terms of the criteria as they were initially laid out. Nobel's will, in establishing the prize, asserted that it should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".

Instead, Gore and the climate centre were awarded the prize for 'raising awareness on climate change', which sounds pretty damn wonderful but means little in terms in achieving peace. However you look at it, it's clear that the motivation here is political.

And if we're going to justify this prize on the basis that Gore's campaign might save lives and reduce conflict in future (itself a highly debateable charge), then there are others far more deserving of the award then he is. How about the corporations spanning the globe and bringing countries closer together through trade and economic integration? The Golden Arches Theory of International Relations has held up pretty well so far, so why don't we award the Peace Prize to McDonalds? The concept is no different.

Unfortunately, this award will just propel the pompous Gore into even greater heights of authority, despite the fact that his celebrated film contains numerous inaccuracies, falsehoods and gross exaggerations. It will encourage yet more people to have an emotional (and thus stupid) response to global warming, instead of the measured and rational approach that is needed.

[theholeinthedonut]

It sure is easy to talk the talk after you had so many years to walk the walk but never did it.

[achilles]

Good news. He's done a lot

[name already taken]

I shouldn't need to point out that this is completely ridiculous. Gore has done nothing to bring peace to any corner of the world, he has resolved no conflicts and built no long-term institutions. Simply put, he has done absolutely nothing that would qualify him for the Peace Prize in terms of the criteria as they were initially laid out. Nobel's will, in establishing the prize, asserted that it should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".

Instead, Gore and the climate centre were awarded the prize for 'raising awareness on climate change', which sounds pretty damn wonderful but means little in terms in achieving peace. However you look at it, it's clear that the motivation here is political.

And if we're going to justify this prize on the basis that Gore's campaign might save lives and reduce conflict in future (itself a highly debateable charge), then there are others far more deserving of the award then he is. How about the corporations spanning the globe and bringing countries closer together through trade and economic integration? The Golden Arches Theory of International Relations has held up pretty well so far, so why don't we award the Peace Prize to McDonalds? The concept is no different.

Unfortunately, this award will just propel the pompous Gore into even greater heights of authority, despite the fact that his celebrated film contains numerous inaccuracies, falsehoods and gross exaggerations. It will encourage yet more people to have an emotional (and thus stupid) response to global warming, instead of the measured and rational approach that is needed.
Well, it might be that some misleaded people feel that Global Warming might be a far more dangerous threat than a few terrorists hiding in a cave somewhere.

But these few individuals can only be misguided by the conspiration of the powers that be, as everyone else knows.

[STIG]

omg are you super serial?

[pfcsmith1371]

You should've got it !

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/

Nah, there too afraid to give it to an organization(s) that actually tries to make a difference in the world.;-)

[Maktab]

Well, it might be that some misleaded people feel that Global Warming might be a far more dangerous threat than a few terrorists hiding in a cave somewhere.

But these few individuals can only be misguided by the conspiration of the powers that be, as everyone else knows.

Yet surely even if true, that's not a question of peace but of health and economics? If people are dying because of droughts or whatnot, it's not a lack of peace that's killing them. 'Raising awareness on global warming' has nothing to do with the Nobel Peace Prize as it has traditionally been envisaged and awarded.

Regardless of whether Gore's right or wrong, the simple fact is that there's no rational reason to award him the Nobel Peace Prize for what he's done. That's what's ridiculous.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Personally I think he does deserve this award. Make no mistake global warming is a serious problem. And the problems that global warming will cause in the future are going to be the cause of wars in the future.

Currently wars have been waged over marriages, land, resources, idealogical reasons and commerce. Global warming is going to be causing massive drought, food shortages, water shortages, rising sea levels and the changes that are predicted are unless action is taken is going to lead nations to war.

There is 2 countries to the north of Australia for example that have over 1 billion people each. Australia has a population of 21 million. A population that does not use all available land. When the water levels start rising and hundreds of millions of people need to be moved what would you do?

Short of some doomsday scenario global warming is the most significant threat this planet faces.

[Jaeger07]

Good choice. EU would also have been a good choice.

But he deserves it!

[Invisigoth]

Good pick.

[name already taken]

Yet surely even if true, that's not a question of peace but of health and economics? If people are dying because of droughts or whatnot, it's not a lack of peace that's killing them. 'Raising awareness on global warming' has nothing to do with the Nobel Peace Prize as it has traditionally been envisaged and awarded.

Regardless of whether Gore's right or wrong, the simple fact is that there's no rational reason to award him the Nobel Peace Prize for what he's done. That's what's ridiculous.
It just means that when people try to solve real problems, they don't have time to create false ones.

As Thomas Edison said: "Opportunity comes as a lot of work dressed in cheap clothes. That's why so many people never see any."

Our big corporations always have been too chicken to adress the pollution/global warming and other environmental that came into the attention since the 1970's.

Al Gore started to raise the attention on these issues since no one else would dare to take the challenge.

This "no one else" includes General Electric and all its freinds who owns most of the wealth and resources in this world, if you ask me.

They're too busy creating false problems to address real ones. It's not their fault.

[Maktab]

Actually, global sea levels are predicted to rise by between 5 and 20 inches at most by 2100, a century from now. Hardly a doomsday swamping, and certainly not outside our ability to adapt to.

Besides, it's not at all certain that Gore's approach is better or will save more lives. Global warming was a huge issue before he made himself a spokesman on it, and his approach encourages an emotional and largely irrational response in any case. Global warming is not all bad; some regions may well benefit. For example, rising temperatures could allow the US to increase its agricultural yields by up to 20%, feeding a lot more people.

So the question is really how best to manage what is, without a doubt, a serious issue. Cutting back drastically on emissions within a decade or two, as proposed by Gore, is short-sighted and stupid. For one, does anybody truly believe that China, India, Brazil and other developing countries will not continue polluting at ever-higher rates even if the US, Europe and Australia cripple their economies by instituting punishing CO2 caps? After all, China is predicted to be the world's undisputed top CO2 emitter by the end of this year, with its emissions growing at an enormous rate.

Plus, by crippling economies and thus retarding technological progress, you're actually increasing the possibility of the sort of social unrest that can lead to wars. Countries will be less able to solve solutions peacefully and will be more likely to resort to brute force to get what they want.

A far better approach is to do what we can (within rational limits) to reduce emissions, while directing most of our focus on limiting the effects of global warming. That means engineering crops that withstand higher temperatures better, it means conducting heavy research into less energy-intensive desalination, it means figuring out how to make more efficient use of scarce resources like water, all through technological means. Rather than trying to change the planet back to what we think the ideal temperature should be, we'll be far better off 100 years from now if we make mankind wealthier, smarter and better protected against climate change and natural disasters.

[Maktab]

It just means that when people try to solve real problems, they don't have time to create false ones.
I assure you that many, many people are working flat out to come up with concrete solutions to the problems global warming brings. And they're not flying around the world in private jets, living in energy-intensive houses or standing on stages.


As Thomas Edison said: "Opportunity comes as a lot of work dressed in cheap clothes. That's why so many people never see any."

Our big corporations always have been too chicken to adress the pollution/global warming and other environmental that came into the attention since the 1970's.
Big corporations just follow what people want, since there's no point in going against your customers. But I think it's worth pointing out that by far the majority of research into cleaner energy, more efficient cars and the like are coming out of big corporations. Again, these are concrete solutions that are being invented and produced.


Al Gore started to raise the attention on these issues since no one else would dare to take the challenge.
Nonsense, global warming was a huge issue before Al Gore opened his mouth. In fact, it was a big issue while he was Vice President, when he did sweet bugger-all about it. It's easier to make a big noise when you're not the one making the difficult decisions, isn't it?


This "no one else" includes General Electric and all its freinds who owns most of the wealth and resources in this world, if you ask me.

They're too busy creating false problems to address real ones. It's not their fault.
You're sounding way too conspiratorial. Big corporations are fragile, they rely entirely on the wishes and desires of their customers. Do you think Shell, BP and Chevron-Texaco *really* wanted to plough millions of dollars into alternative energy research? Hell no, oil was easy and they're good at it. But they can see the winds changing, they can see people wanting a change, and so they're being forced to move with the times or be left behind. In the process, they're coming up with technological solutions to our problems that people actually want to buy, like flourescent lightbulbs.

[daily666]

Wait, what did he do for the World Peace? "efforts to build up and disseminate knowledge about man-made climate change", WTF???

[Bert]

So, the Nobel Peace Prize has turned into the 'Nobel General Do-Goody Prize'? What's this coming to? What's the point of this prize if it's just going to be handed out to any charital worker working on whatever happens to be fashionable at the moment? Besides, Al Gore is not deserving of it. Al Gore is using the attention climate change is getting to buy himself some political clout. His films are not objective factual documentaries, they are frauds. If you're going to hand out the peace prize to people who work on climate change, at least find some non-partisan researchers rather than this bloated air bag.

I am so proud of my country and this fantastic Nobel Committee. Other than our parliament I'd wager there's no worse waste of oxygen than these people.

[Thor]

^^

I agree and assume that you were being sarcastic about the Norwegian Nobel Committee.

It share most of it's characteristics with a Bono fan-club and by so becomes quite predictable.

I think the tragedy lies in the fact that there are many individuals out there who work very hard and sacrifice very much to promote or mediate actual peace or resolvement of conflicts. I would much rather have them receive this form of encouragement and recognition as well as the financial support it brings.

As for picking Al Gore you can't overlook the question whether there might be politics involved in this. Partly it might be meant to catapult him into the American Presidential race...

[LMAV]

It makes no difference that hes out their telling lies! His video is full of half truths and spin, yet I guess thats ok since its for the global warming causes huh?

Bush tells the world Saddam has WMD and the world hates him for it, Gore does it and hes given a Nobel Prize! Not to mention hes a much bigger polluter of the planet than most of the earths population!

[Maktab]

As for picking Al Gore you can't overlook the question whether there might be politics involved in this. Partly it might be meant to catapult him into the American Presidential race...
I think you've hit the nail on the head there. The motivation here is most likely political.

[Fiber]

First off, I would like to say I agree with a lot of your points, Maktab. Climate change or the lack there of is something I debate often, but not in this thread.


Nonsense, global warming was a huge issue before Al Gore opened his mouth. In fact, it was a big issue while he was Vice President, when he did sweet bugger-all about it. It's easier to make a big noise when you're not the one making the difficult decisions, isn't it?

He was actually working on the issue some thirty years ago. Well at least so he said in an interview I saw on TV.

And yes it is easier to make a lot of noise when "you're not the one making the difficult decisions". When you are part of the government you can't just run around spreading your own gospel. You are in this position because people voted for you (or in his case, someone else) and with it comes obligations.

Former elected officials working for a single cause after leaving office is not something new.

[LMAV]

And yes it is easier to make a lot of noise when "you're not the one making the difficult decisions". When you are part of the government you can't just run around spreading your own gospel.



The problem is , not even HE lives by his own mantra. The guy lives more lavishly and uses more energy than most humans on this planet!

[Fiber]

The problem is , not even HE lives by his own mantra. The guy lives more lavishly and uses more energy than most humans on this planet!

I know. It's not very trust inducing.

It's kinda like when you invade a country to spread democracy but cheat on your own election. Hypothetically speaking of course.

I kid I kid :D The trust inducing part was serious..

Still he made a lot of people aware of the issue. People who might not have woken up until the sea flooded their beds. You have to give him credit for that, no matter how much you disagree with him.

I believe they gave the prize to two parties to cover both the scientific part of the issue as well as the popular/grass root part. It doesn't help much having a guy in a suit talking about climate change without the science to back him up. And it doesn't help much to have a lot of scientists publishing a bunch of papers only scientists read. Will this issue be the root to future conflicts? I believe so. Only time will tell...if the winners of the prize don't get the changes they want... Is there other people/organizations who deserve the prize, of course!

[Snoshi]

Why? Him and Bono should just f-off.

[Thor]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

[LMAV]

Still he made a lot of people aware of the issue. People who might not have woken up until the sea flooded their beds. You have to give him credit for that, no matter how much you disagree with him.


Why would I give him credit for something that is a fairy tale? He's taking what is a natural cycle of the planet, and turning in to a man made apocalypse from which he wants to gain power. Doesn't that bother you at all?

Where are all the tin foil hats worried about what people like him might do to human rights in the name of combating global warming?


http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp


Yet another example of why people should stop and think all this stuff through more. Why is Al Gore's lifestyle not an issue?

[seraosha]

Yasser Arafat
Jimmie Carter
Al Gore

Yea, I'm not surprised.

[Breakfast in Vegas]

Congrats to Al Gore and well-done. He has indeed done a lot to bring attention to this issue, especially in the environmentally-unconscious US of A.

[Fiber]

What I think he should get credit for is beeing able to get so many peoples attention. You may or may not like what he is saying but he gets people to listen.

Adolf may have done a lot of bad things but he got peoples attention ;)

[Huhtis]

What an Ass.
This should have been given to someone who has actually contributed to peace and stability between nations, not some wank-off-at-himself-jerk who just spouts half bull**** and half crappy powerpoint animations.

No good!

This Ass tries to change somewhat unstable stable planet which has it´s own cycle of cold and warm seasons, we are at bottom of warm season now and I bet my ass we are going to have it pretty cold soon when it starts to cool again.

[LMAV]

especially in the environmentally-unconscious US of A.

You see, its comments like this that just make me want to pull my hair out. What are you talking about? Most of the country doesn't use anywhere near the energy Al Gore does!

[Kaerry]

Excellent choice, he has done a lot of good.

[XASA]

Al Gore served in Vietnam when others found a way out, was in the House of Representatives for eight years, the Senate for another eight years, Vice President for eight years, Democratic nominee for President (and won the popular vote), Academy Award winner, Emmy Award winner and now Nobel Peace Prize winner, and never a hint of scandal in his public or private life; however, the right wing kooks condemn him as if he was the anti-Christ. What a perverted point of view some of you guys have. I'm proud that an American won the prize, especially in these trying times. Thank God right wing extremists are a dwindling minority in this great country of ours.

[Hollis]

Al Gore served in Vietnam when others found a way out, .



That is a great laugh, so did Kerry too. Do you realize that over 99% of Americans "found a way out".

I wish people would not pitch partisan politics.

There were places in Viet-Nam that makes Palm Springs California look dangerous.

um boko dinki dou (your crazy man!!), That is probably what Hoi would have said to you.


Hoi was a KCS that I worked with, he was ex-VC mortar man.

[Rictor]

http://www.morethings.com/fan/south_park/photo_gallery/al-gore-is-manbearpig.jpg

Not only has Al Gore killed ManBearPig but he's single-handedly solved global warming. Forever. Three cheers for humanity's hero!

[XASA]

That is a great laugh, so did Kerry too. Do you realize that over 99% of Americans "found a way out".

I wish people would not pitch partisan politics.

There were places in Viet-Nam that makes Palm Springs California look dangerous.

um boko dinki dou (your crazy man!!), That is probably what Hoi would have said to you.


Hoi was a KCS that I worked with, he was ex-VC mortar man.

He served in Vietnam. Case closed. Try "Swift Boating" someone else for a change.

[California Joe]

It doesn't effect my life one single bit.

[Hollis]

He served in Vietnam. Case closed. Try "Swift Boating" someone else for a change.


LOLOL................................. Man that is SOOOOOO weak,

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

I shouldn't need to point out that this is completely ridiculous. Gore has done nothing to bring peace to any corner of the world, he has resolved no conflicts and built no long-term institutions. Simply put, he has done absolutely nothing that would qualify him for the Peace Prize in terms of the criteria as they were initially laid out. Nobel's will, in establishing the prize, asserted that it should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".


I guess there hasn't been enough peace in the world to find a more qualified candidate.

[Breakfast in Vegas]

You see, its comments like this that just make me want to pull my hair out. What are you talking about? Most of the country doesn't use anywhere near the energy Al Gore does!
He has drawn attention to the issue, I didnt claim he was a saint nor am I a fan of his. And quite frankly, I don't know how much energy he uses.

Environmental issues are important on both an industrial and citizen level. He drew a lot of attention to it... people are at least talking about. That's a start to actually doing something about it.

I don't want America and the American economy to be disadvantaged in the future because we didn't prepare for the economic and environmental realities of the future.

As for him winning the prize, I am sure there were other candidates out there who did more for "peace"... but I can't think of any, nor is it my job to decide who wins. So congrats to Gore. Why not. At least it's something positive to associate with America.

[XASA]

LOLOL................................. Man that is SOOOOOO weak,

Very immature response Hollis. I expected better from you based on some of your previous posts. Obviously, I was wrong.

The topic was about Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize and I commented on some of his achievements. Instead of making a coherent statement as to why you disagree, you made light of his Vietnam experience as if you are the one and only arbiter as to whose service counts and whose doesn't. When you are ready to discuss the topic in an adult manner, let us know. Until then, carry on stud!

[syncmaster001]

nobel, oscar etc. all of them are in hands of politics. ignore them

[Maktab]

He was a military journalist in Vietnam serving with an engineer outfit, not a combat soldier, if we're going to nitpick. But so what? This isn't about Al Gore, the man, it's about the spectacular unsuitability of awarding the man the Nobel PEACE Prize for, ahem, "efforts to build up and disseminate knowledge about man-made climate change".

If the guy was given the "Promoting the cause against Global Warming" award or the "You're such a swell guy" award, I wouldn't give a damn. The prize would match the context and all would be right with the world. But however good you might think his work on global warming might be, it simply makes absolutely zero logical sense to award him the Nobel Peace Prize for it. He hasn't made any meaningful contribution to peace, so what's the award for? And surely there were more deserving candidates, such as those who actually worked towards resolving conflicts and achieving peace?

[Breakfast in Vegas]

He was a military journalist in Vietnam serving with an engineer outfit, not a combat soldier, if we're going to nitpick. But so what? This isn't about Al Gore, the man, it's about the spectacular unsuitability of awarding the man the Nobel PEACE Prize for, ahem, "efforts to build up and disseminate knowledge about man-made climate change".

If the guy was given the "Promoting the cause against Global Warming" award or the "You're such a swell guy" award, I wouldn't give a damn. The prize would match the context and all would be right with the world. But however good you might think his work on global warming might be, it simply makes absolutely zero logical sense to award him the Nobel Peace Prize for it. He hasn't made any meaningful contribution to peace, so what's the award for? And surely there were more deserving candidates, such as those who actually worked towards resolving conflicts and achieving peace?
That indeed should be the issue.

[ViktorNavorski]

Al Gore served in Vietnam when others found a way out, was in the House of Representatives for eight years, the Senate for another eight years, Vice President for eight years, Democratic nominee for President (and won the popular vote big whoop, so did the losing candidates in 1824, 1876, 1888 and 1960), Academy Award winner, Emmy Award winnerSo what...what does any of those things have to do with "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." recently.


and now Nobel Peace Prize winner, and never a hint of scandal in his public or private life; however, the right wing kooks condemn him as if he was the anti-Christ. What a perverted point of view some of you guys have. I'm proud that an American won the prize, especially in these trying times. Thank God right wing extremists are a dwindling minority in this great country of ours.And not a single word about global warming or the promotion of world peace in your post. This isn't a debate about his grandiose personal achievements or how good a drinking buddy the guy is, it's about what he done recently according to the criteria set forth by the Nobel Peace Prize. You're employing the same tactic as political campaigners from both sides of the isle, listing someone great credentials and somehow they are suppose to be beyond criticism and those that do are label "extremists" or "perverted."

I don't believe he deserve the prize, even if the requirement somehow involved promoting global warming awareness because the man doesn't practice what he preach. His home isn't environmentally friendly, his whole Live Earth concert events had a big carbon footprint that contributed to the problem and not the solution and traversing around in fuel-inefficient limo and private jet while ironically promoting a supposed documentary on an environmental problems. At least the UN committee formulated the Kyoto Protocol, what with "fraternity between the nations," Al Gore achievement in the area...still debatable (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1670807,00.html?xid=rss-topstories).

[I can't think of a name]

He served in Vietnam. Case closed. Try "Swift Boating" someone else for a change.

Man you are not very bright

[szr]

ANALYSIS-Nobel is sweet revenge for Gore, blow to Bush

By Matt Spetalnick

WASHINGTON, Oct 12 (*******) - Call it Al Gore's revenge.

The Nobel Peace Prize he won on Friday was a blow to U.S. President George W. Bush and his widely criticized environmental policy and will long be savored by the man who lost the bitter 2000 presidential election by a whisker.

The honor was bestowed jointly on the former vice president and the U.N. climate panel for campaigning against the threat of global warming, in a not-so-subtle swipe at Bush, a latecomer to the battle against climate change.

It may also be interpreted as a part of an international backlash not only against seven years of what many see as environmental backsliding under Bush but also against his Iraq war policy and perceived arrogance in world affairs.

"The Nobel Committee's recognition of Vice President Gore shines a bright light on the most inconvenient truth of all -- the selection of George Bush as president has endangered the peace and prosperity of the entire planet," said fellow Democrat John Edwards, a 2008 White House contender.

It was a double slap to the Republican president, marking the second prize to a leading Democratic critic during Bush's administration.

The 2002 prize went to former President Jimmy Carter, which the Nobel committee head at the time said was a signal of disapproval over Bush's preparations for the invasion of Iraq.

For Gore -- who won the popular vote for president nationwide but lost a crucial Florida vote recount battle and thus the election to Bush -- the Nobel Peace Prize brought a measure of vindication.

After the 2000 election, he remade himself as a tireless environmental campaigner, winning an Oscar in 2007 for his documentary film "An Inconvenient Truth."

Gore is now being treated like a rock star by Democratic supporters who want him to jump into the 2008 presidential race to claim the office they believe he was unfairly denied.

BUSH'S WOES

While Gore has grown in international stature since his narrow election loss, Bush has seen his credibility damaged at home and abroad by the Iraq war and other foreign policy woes.

He is struggling to stave off lame-duck status and stay relevant while increasingly hemmed in by a hostile Democratic majority in Congress. His inner circle is steadily eroding with almost weekly departures of key aides and advisers.

And the president's public approval rating, which soared to 90 percent after the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001, has sunk close to historic lows, with some polls putting it below 30 percent.

Around the world, Bush has won few friends with his stance on Gore's signature issue -- climate change.

At a White House-convened summit last month, some of the world's biggest greenhouse polluters called Bush "isolated" and questioned his leadership on the problem of global warming.

Bush has rejected the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that sets limits on industrial nations' greenhouse gas emissions, and instead favors voluntary targets to curb emissions.

His acknowledgment of a problem highlighted a shift from his previous questioning of the science linking human activity to rising global temperatures.

But despite his concessions on global warming, Bush has continued to face deep scepticism over his efforts to rally support for emissions goals instead of fixed limits.

The White House on Friday praised Gore and the U.N. climate panel for winning what many consider the world's most prestigious honor, and Nobel Committee chairman Ole Danbolt Mjoes insisted the award "is never criticism of anyone."

But Gore has been a frequent critic of Bush's environmental policy, urging him last month to follow the example set by the late Republican President Ronald Reagan in supporting efforts to protect the ozone layer by showing leadership in the fight against global warming.

Increasing international recognition of the threat of climate change helped make Gore the betting choice to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

Bush had been considered by betting services to be the definitive longshot -- at more than 100 to 1.http://www.*******.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN12207344
Nobel is sweet revenge for Gore, blow to BushAnd therein lies exactly why one should be skeptical of what the Nobel Peace Prize has become in the last two decades: the politcal tool of a very politcal body, disguised as something the typical layperson probably assumes is above or beyond politics.

Congrats to Gore, however. It will look great next to his Oscar.

[California Joe]

Man you are not very bright

You ain't exactly burning up the forums with your huge intellect either pal.

[Tokamak]

... Global warming is not all bad; some regions may well benefit. For example, rising temperatures could allow the US to increase its agricultural yields by up to 20%, feeding a lot more people.





Yes sure and the US is going to give that extra food to those who are suffering because of global warming. It has always being said that global warming is going to affect more to the less protected. So sure here in England we are going to have great weather I wouldn't complain about that but hell in other parts of the world are not going to have anything because of the damn weather.

[Bia]

You ain't exactly burning up the forums with your huge intellect either pal.

LMAO I was scrolling down to reply with same sentiment.... but as usual... you hit the nail on the head before the Bia.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

All you anti-Algore people are barking up the wrong tree. The Nobel Peace Prize isn't about actually doing anything, or having accomplished a single thing - it's about being on the "correct" side of the issue du-jour. You know, the side that Europe likes. Whether it's saving our precious mother earth, or peace in the Mideast (hello former winner Arafat - can you hear me down there?) It's about feelings, and wanting to do the right thing- not about accomplishing anything - or hell, even being factually correct for that matter. Think of it as a seal of approval from the people who are the best, and most important. They even give out a prize to indicate that their approval really, really means something.

[muttbutt]

You know, the side that Europe likes.
Could you not lump everyone here into the "smelly hippy anti American ranks of the great pinko left" thanks, I don't agree with what they did.....tired of being labled because of where I'm from

[Maktab]

Yes sure and the US is going to give that extra food to those who are suffering because of global warming. It has always being said that global warming is going to affect more to the less protected. So sure here in England we are going to have great weather I wouldn't complain about that but hell in other parts of the world are not going to have anything because of the damn weather.

Well yes, the US already donates millions of tons of grain a year. Besides, it's not like African countries are all too poor to buy the grain, or that there's a shortage of people willing to donate the money for it. Most starvation is quite preventable, were it not for government incompetence or malice.

In any case, if global warming is going to affect the poorest most of all, does it not make sense that it should be a priority to encourage their development and advancement so that they may be more protected against the climate and natural disasters? Except, the development needed to do that means industrial development and power stations, which means pollution. This is inevitable, unless you want to forcibly restrict the development of poor countries in the name of restricing CO2 levels.

Hard CO2 caps are impractical and, arguably, immoral. We're better off going full-tilt towards figuring out how to actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere whilst inventing new technologies and ideas that will mitigate the effects global warming will bring.

[signatory]

"Yeah I spent 8 years in the White house doing pretty much nothing..."

"Then my jet and I travelled the globe..talked about a movie some other guys made."

"For that I win the peace prize... "

"lol"

"And other people waste their whole lives fighting things like oppression or mediate wars or whatever..."

"It's ridiculous. But hell yeah I will accept it.. the more people I can annoy the better! "

"And I do look good in gold."

[Moose]

Al Gore doesn’t say you can’t fly he says you should take the train instead “if you can”. It is good that the media is scrutinising the man and his statements. However one should take in to recollection that this subject is highly infected and one ought to accept that both sides will go slightly overboard in their attempts to reach “and discourage” the “masses”. The character assassination will continue.

One needs to get back to the subject at hand which is global warming. It seems that the Nobel committee thinks that this subject is indeed very real. If for the arguments sake you say it is real and ponder the consequences draught, flooding. There is already fighting over water and other recourses in places of the earth so it isn’t ludicrous to expect the level of friction to increase thus so the tendency to open warfare that is IF you believe the theory.

If you accept the theory it then makes perfect sense for the Nobel committee to award Mr Gore with this price and I for one congratulate him.

Those of you who think that this was a political stunt “I a am lenient towards that idea” I think it says more about who is being “punished” than it does Mr Gore

[Hollis]

Very immature response Hollis. I expected better from you based on some of your previous posts. Obviously, I was wrong.




Your reply is BS, You want to be a Gore devotee, knock yourself out. You want to make Gore your messiah, same same. But GW is not the anti-messiah. You can believe that if you wish too.

Kerry was nailed by more than the Swift boat people. If Kerry's requirement for a Purple Heart was universal, every Bush Marine would have hundred to tens of hundred Purple hearts.

I don't know if you were in-country, sure don't sound like it. Don't know if you where in ASA either. I have had several friends who retired that where in ASA.

Maybe like Guys that run around claiming SF, green beany steely eye killer, who where never on a team, only handed out basket balls, or flipped burgers in the mess.


Saying he was in RVN or not is BS, less than 3 million Americans where, our of 300 Million, meaning 99.9+ % Americans never where in country.


So what does that say about Bill Clinton, or Hillary Clinton, Obama, Edwards and now 347 Million other Americans. Who where never in-country.


Kerry, spit on his tour, his brothers in arms, All Viet-Nam Vets and then running for Pres, he made a big thing about being a "combat" Viet-Nam Vet..............

I would suggest you look at those who were "held" at LBJ, (long Bin Jail (SP)) they were all Viet-Nam Vets too and criminals, Liars, rapists, murderers, Etc...


Gore had what JOB in-country? for how long.

Actually, I have no big problems with Gore's service. He did his job, Unlike Kerry. But to make some sort of sanctimonious affair about Gore being in RVN is BS over someone or many who where not.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Could you not lump everyone here into the "smelly hippy anti American ranks of the great pinko left" thanks, I don't agree with what they did.....tired of being labled because of where I'm from

Regretfully, after careful consideration, I've decided to keep doing it. Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated.

Europe and America are different, with different agendas etc., and I don't really see anything wrong with pointing that out. I didn't say that Europe was a bunch of a-holes or that America was better - but it's very clear that Europe to a much greater extent, has been drinking the global-warming flavored Kool-Aid. Doesn't mean I have to regard Gore as anything more than an opportunist charlatan. He's a flim-flam artist who's misrepresentations may serve a useful purpose. So we pat the monkey on the head when he dances for us.

The Pharaohs perpetuated a lie based in fear, and told the people of Egypt that the way to eternal life was to spend their days on Earth building huge-ass piles of rock. Who cares if it may not have been true - they were all gonna die eventually anyhow, but at least we have the pyramids now and they're pretty cool. What else were they gonna do out there in the desert? They had to do something - might as well sell carbon offsets and solar panels.

[Hollis]

All you anti-Algore people are barking up the wrong tree. The Nobel Peace Prize isn't about actually doing anything, or having accomplished a single thing - it's about being on the "correct" side of the issue du-jour. You know, the side that Europe likes. Whether it's saving our precious mother earth, or peace in the Mideast (hello former winner Arafat - can you hear me down there?) It's about feelings, and wanting to do the right thing- not about accomplishing anything - or hell, even being factually correct for that matter. Think of it as a seal of approval from the people who are the best, and most important. They even give out a prize to indicate that their approval really, really means something.


This about says it all.................

Arafat anyone?

[Weasel]

Congratulations! woot

[XASA]

Your reply is BS, You want to be a Gore devotee, knock yourself out. You want to make Gore your messiah, same same. But GW is not the anti-messiah. You can believe that if you wish too.

Kerry was nailed by more than the Swift boat people. If Kerry's requirement for a Purple Heart was universal, every Bush Marine would have hundred to tens of hundred Purple hearts.

I don't know if you were in-country, sure don't sound like it. Don't know if you where in ASA either. I have had several friends who retired that where in ASA.

Maybe like Guys that run around claiming SF, green beany steely eye killer, who where never on a team, only handed out basket balls, or flipped burgers in the mess.


Saying he was in RVN or not is BS, less than 3 million Americans where, our of 300 Million, meaning 99.9+ % Americans never where in country.


So what does that say about Bill Clinton, or Hillary Clinton, Obama, Edwards and now 347 Million other Americans. Who where never in-country.


Kerry, spit on his tour, his brothers in arms, All Viet-Nam Vets and then running for Pres, he made a big thing about being a "combat" Viet-Nam Vet..............

I would suggest you look at those who were "held" at LBJ, (long Bin Jail (SP)) they were all Viet-Nam Vets too and criminals, Liars, rapists, murderers, Etc...


Gore had what JOB in-country? for how long.

Actually, I have no big problems with Gore's service. He did his job, Unlike Kerry. But to make some sort of sanctimonious affair about Gore being in RVN is BS over someone or many who where not.

I don't have a problem with someone disagreeing with me but I do find it rather disheartening when someone questions my military service and those of others. But, hey, that's par for the course with some of those on the Right who are quick to denounce those who served in Vietnam if they are Democrats while supporting those you didn't serve if they are Republican. Get off of your high horse dude.

In my original post, I never said I considered Gore or any other politician to be a messiah figure. I just listed what I thought were commendable achievements by anyone, including his Vietnam service. The fact that one percent of the eligible population served in Vietnam makes his and Kerry's service honorable despite the whining from the right wing fringe. Plus, I commented on what I consider to be typical right wing mud slinging from some-- not all-- who are upset with him winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Fortunately, most of the country and the world consider it a high honor even if some of you don't. Finally, I also express pride in the fact that an American won.

Now, to you taking the thread off-topic by questioning my service:

Hollis, because of your service, you should know better than anyone that the Vietnam War experience was different for individuals based on where you served, when you served, with who you served and what was your MOS. Someone who was in-country in 1967 in the Navy in the Delta had an entirely different experience than someone stationed in the Air Force in Ton Son Nhut in 1968 let alone someone stationed in ASA in Phu Bai in 1971.

I believe you said you were a Marine infantryman. Good for you. Believe it or not, a lot of people didn't spend time in the grass like you-- I believe only one in ten were combat arms-- and, frankly, didn't want to. In fact, towards the end of the war, most did everything possible to be a REMF and if I'm quilty of anything it's being extremely grateful to have a MOS (voice intercept operator), a high security clearance, and access to very sensitive material that precluded the possibility of capture, ergo, safely inside the wire with hot food and cold beer every night. If we were to use your criteria for what amounts to service to our country, then only combat arms should be commended for being in Iraq and Afghanistan while everyone else should be slandered because they are perhaps "flipping burgers". You, of all people should know better than that.

For some reason, you come off as thinking that all Vietnam Veterans think alike, which is hogwash. Again, you should know better than anyone that the military in the 1960s and early 1970s had a broad cross-section of people-- Lifers, draftees, big city kids, rural farmers, blacks, Hispanics, "heads" and "juicers" to name just a few-- who had different opinions just like the civilian population we came from. Just because you disagreed with someone didn't mean you disrespected them, like you just did me. As for those poor bastards who were in LBJ, there has always been hardheads in the military, which is why you still have stockades and Ft. Leavenworth. I'm sure the MPs are just as busy arresting people in Iraq as they were in Vietnam for any number of crimes.

As to me being in the Army Security Agency: ASA was made up of the best and the brightest and if I was going to claim being in a unit I wasn't in, it wouldn't be the Agency. Most enlisted men in the Agency were eligible to be officers because of the high scores we had on our entrance tests. There were no draftees in the Agency; we were all volunteers. We had to make an initial commitment of four years (I reenlisted for an extra two) because of the time we spent in training. Of the 72 months I was in the service, 16 months were in training. Aside from being stationed in Berlin and Phu Bai, I also spent a year at NSA at Ft. Meade, MD. ASA wasn't about brawn but about brains. So, if I was to make up a story it would certainly be a much simpler one like SF than ASA. I don't doubt you have ex ASA buddies who agree with you politically because I have several, who I've known for 40 years, who I disagree with politically. Despite the fact we "agree to disagree," whenever we chat on-line or at reunions doesn't mean I do not consider them to be still close friends. Too bad you and others allow your politics to get in the way of what could be a decent dialogue. I have no problem discussing my service with any of your so-called ASA acquintances because I'm sure we would find we had more things in common than things we disagreed about. I'm sorry that is not the case with you.

[Alpheus]

In other news, it turns out that the Goreacle's masterpiece isn't quite as factual as you might think. Imagine my surprise. http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1287915,00.html

A list of the inaccuracies from elsewhere:
The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

[Hollis]

XASA, as I mentioned I did not remember what you mentioned that you where or where you where. And Yes, RVN was everything from a hell hole to heaven and everything in between.

I do not believe being in RVN gave me any special insights on running this country, our political system and being anymore specially qualified for any elected position. I don't think it necessary did that for anyone else. If it did that would probably be a requirement for office.

Your the person who made service in-country being unique and as you just posted it could have meant just about anything in RVN, or is it?

Again you missed my comment on flipping burgers, I did not discredit the job of a cook, it is when they play A Team member. Ie; Kerry PH's and war medal... and your swift boat reaction. Support is a critical job, a lot of people are alive to day because Support did their job. Your reading skills are not too good. It is not that a person served, it is when they pretend to be something else. BTW YOUR remark about "At least he was in Viet-Nam"......... where you not degrading all those who served in the Guard, or in other A/Os through out the world, are their service to country? Also what about those who never where in the military, ie, Bill Clinton, or Obama, or Hillary or............

Why the games?

BTW, In the Marines we did not use REMF, A new guy was a BNG, bran new guy, we got another Marine not a liability. I never liked that term, though understood some of the hard feeling "Legs" had for some in the back.

I do not discredit anyone who serves our country, Military service is just one form of service. Gore did his duty, as I mentioned and I have no problems with that. Read my previous post, I already mention that.

I do find it funny what his utility bills are ($33K per year), even compared to GW ranch in Crawford TX. I am also very much into ecology and have been a long time. All one needs to understand the issue is to have a aquarium, we eat, crap, and die in our own little bow. Our environment is extremely precious, and will be more so as the global population and competition of resources increase. I thought his film had a lot of errors in it.

I believe the 3 E's are important, Environment, Education and Economy. You can not destroy the economy and preserve the other two. Business' need to be responsible but not whipping boys of "wild eyed" environmentalists/preservationist.

[LMAV]

In other news, it turns out that the Goreacle's masterpiece isn't quite as factual as you might think. Imagine my surprise. http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1287915,00.html

A list of the inaccuracies from elsewhere:
The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

The thing you need to understand about the people who buy in to all of this crap, is that they don't care if any of it was true. To them, the cause is real and the message needs to be spread by any means necessary. If you need to lie in order to accomplish that goal, more power to you.

[Hollis]

The thing you need to understand about the people who buy in to all of this crap, is that they don't care if any of it was true. To them, the cause is real and the message needs to be spread by any means necessary. If you need to lie in order to accomplish that goal, more power to you.


The tradedy is that they are doing the opposite of what they say they are doing. You can not fix what is broke, if you lie about it.

[Flagg]

When exactly did the Nobel Peace Prize become the Nobel Marketing Prize?

Who were the judges?

Saachi & Saachi and/or the International Association of Carbon traders?


I'm not about to applaud anyone who wants to take even more money out of my pockets for absolutely nothing in return and require me to thank him as my "savior" and smile while he's doing it....like some voodoo village shaman.

I'm not a global warming denier anti-semetic rascist puppy hater......I'm just not convinced human activity is a significant enough factor to mandatorily force me to change my already frugal by choice existence.

[signatory]

Ya know in 1905 Norway became independent from Sweden... something Nobel probably didn't calculate on when he wrote the will. A reason people think he gave it to Norway was just because that country had no foreign policy at all...

And they don't actually have to give a prize, if there's no good candidate they can just forget about it.. not devaluate its meaning like they seem to be doing :| From the webpolls on Swedish newspapers the people don't fancy this selection too much.. about 50% give it a ok.. But oh well this is the way it is..

[Moose]

The movie is 2 years old many of the fackts have changed due tofurther research. Al Gore did not win this alone it was also given to the IPCC. Meny of the innacurasies were discovered by the IPCC so dont go overboard. If you would read upp on what Al Gore has been saying resently you would know that he himselfe admits there are innacurasies in the movie but he did not get the Nobel for his movie.

[Alpheus]

Wrong. He got the peace prize for promoting the dangers of global warming. How does he do this? By making a film about the dangers of global arming. If you think the prize and his movie are totally unrelated, you are deluded.

[Maktab]

^^
And what does promoting the dangers of global warming have to do with ending wars and creating peace again?

[Jaeger07]

Haha the hard-core right-wingers are whining again... It's a though world for you guys now...


Well, concerning the "Al-Gore hasnt done anything for peace" arguments: Even the US military is now going through scenarios of conflicts that is likely to occour because of climate change.

Poverty, drought, mass emigration etc. are ideal for groups like Al-queda.
Nothing is easier than recruting a poor, hungry man without a home into the "fight against the big bad USA".

The peace price is about working for peace and preventing conflict. Al-gore hasn't stopped any conflicts, but he has worked hard to prevent them.

When Muhammad Yunus got the price last year i didnt hear much complaining at all - but he hasn't stopped any existing conflicts either - he has just worked to prevent new. Microcredit is a great tool to beat poverty and prevent conflicts. And stopping global warming is also a great deed wich will prevent human suffering and prevent conflict.


I suggest you hard-liners of the christian US south (i know ur not all in that category, but i have a feeling many of you are) tell us who you think should have won the price.

I think the EU should have won, but Al-Gore is a good choice too.

[signatory]

Haha the hard-core right-wingers are whining again... It's a though world for you guys now...

I suggest you hard-liners of the christian US south (i know ur not all in that category, but i have a feeling many of you are) tell us who you think should have won the price.



According to Norwegian webpolls the price selection is supported by not many more than 50%... you're telling me the rest of the Norwegian public is hard core right wing christians.. ? Cool.

It's a ridiculous choice to give half to Al Gore, the climate panel should have received all or nothing.

[Litti]

Good for Al Gore, deserved it.

Nobel prize winner, United States senator, vice president of the United States and so on.

A man who deserves respect.

[Jaeger07]

According to Norwegian webpolls the price selection is supported by not many more than 50%... you're telling me the rest of the Norwegian public is hard core right wing christians.. ? Cool.

It's a ridiculous choice to give half to Al Gore, the climate panel should have received all or nothing.

Uhm not many more than 50%?, thats quite a good number, in other words he would have won the presidential election here :)

And ofcours Al-gore deserves the price, his award-winning film and work has made the public more aware of these problems.

Who do you think should have won then? (please say george bush)

[LMAV]

I suggest you hard-liners of the christian US south (i know ur not all in that category, but i have a feeling many of you are) tell us who you think should have won the price.Ah, you gotta love stereotypes..

I live in the Midwest and do not beleive in orginized religion.

Uhm not many more than 50%?, thats quite a good number, in other words he would have won the presidential election here :)

And ofcours Al-gore deserves the price, his award-winning film and work has made the public more aware of these problems.

Who do you think should have won then? (please say george bush)

He claims that its not a political video, yet he goes after republicans and the president in the movie. There something wrong with a bold face lie like that, followed up by an award that gives him and the movie more credibility. Why is it that Al Gore retains all this credibility, when he was telling the world for over a decade that Saddam had WMD, terrorist connections and needed to be taken out my the US military? The answer is, because its politically viable to ignore those "misstatements", while pounding the other party for the war.

[Jaeger07]

Ah, you gotta love stereotypes..

I live in the Midwest and do not beleive in orginized religion.

Been to the deep everglades of Florida once, great place great people, but man they are just that steriotype... :)


Just for the record: I've been to the states on several hollydays, its a great nation with friendly people. But the fact that i like you guys doesnt mean i wont argue against you or ridicule you. Thats just me...


Edit: Oh and i agreee on the other thing you said. Most of what Al-Gore does is politicaly based. That doesnt mean its all bad though.

[SBL]

I suggest you hard-liners of the christian US south (i know ur not all in that category, but i have a feeling many of you are) tell us who you think should have won the price.


Hmmm. I can tell you're a man speaking from a position of insight and experience.:roll:

[Alpheus]

Even the US military is now going through scenarios of conflicts that is likely to occour because of climate change.

So? The US military has scenarios for invading Canada. That doesn't mean its going to happen.


The peace price is about working for peace and preventing conflict. Al-gore hasn't stopped any conflicts, but he has worked hard to prevent them.They gave him the prize for trying? I was under the impression that prizes are given to reward achievement.

"for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change"

Where does it mention conflict? Or peace?
Let us for a minute make up a climate change conflict. A war over water between, lets say Zaire and Angola. Let us pretend that Mr. Gore and the IPCC go in and single-handedly broker a ceasefire. That would be an achievement worthy of the prize. Spreading dubious knowledge is not.

And your claim that he deserves the prize since by fighting global warming he is somehow preventing future conflicts is crazy. You can't give awards by guessing what may happen in the future! Look at all the other awards; they are given on the basis of they have done, not what may result from their work. If, and I do mean if, there is some war in the future that is stopped or prevent as a direct result of the IPCC or something that Gore did/said, then you can give them the prize.

And as for your question, I don't think anyone should have won it this year.

[LMAV]

B


Edit: Oh and i agreee on the other thing you said. Most of what Al-Gore does is politicaly based. That doesnt mean its all bad though.

Thanks for proving a point I made earlier.


The thing you need to understand about the people who buy in to all of this crap, is that they don't care if any of it was true. To them, the cause is real and the message needs to be spread by any means necessary. If you need to lie in order to accomplish that goal, more power to you.

[signatory]

Both Norwegian and Swedish peace organisations criticize the price to Al Gore.

Basically they think the commitee is pissing on Nobels grave.

http://www.na.se/artikel.asp?intId=1231090
http://www.nettavisen.no/verden/article1385065.ece

I suppose they represent the religious extremist right-wingers too.

[Jaeger07]

Look at all the other awards; they are given on the basis of they have done, not what may result from their work. If, and I do mean if, there is some war in the future that is stopped or prevent as a direct result of the IPCC or something that Gore did/said, then you can give them the prize.

How do you explain last eyars award then? What conflict did Muhammad Yunus stop?

[Alpheus]

How do you explain last eyars award then? What conflict did Muhammad Yunus stop?

Funny how you automatically assumed I agreed with the awarding of the prize last year. IMO Yanus shouldn't have been given the prize either. He should have received the Nobel prize in economics instead.

[Jaeger07]

Funny how you automatically assumed I agreed with the awarding of the prize last year. IMO Yanus shouldn't have been given the prize either. He should have received the Nobel prize in economics instead.

I didnt assume anything I asked a question.


If you dont like the way the peace-price concept has been expanded, thats a fair point. I dont have a problem with it though.

[Redguy]

What a joke. What next, giving miss South Carolina one for raising geography awareness?

[Alpheus]

I didnt assume anything I asked a question.

Yes, yes you did. By asking me what conflicts he stopped, you are assuming that he stopped any. Which he hasn't.

[Gduwb]

Global warming isn't a lie. If you have trouble believing it, go talk to someone who has actually done research on the subject.

Also, good for Al Gore.

[Ratamacue]

Global warming isn't a lie. If you have trouble believing it, go talk to someone who has actually done research on the subject.No, global warming certainly isn't a lie. But there is no scientific consensus on how much of the effect is being induced by man.

[Alpheus]

Global warming isn't a lie. If you have trouble believing it, go talk to someone who has actually done research on the subject.

I have. I have talked to a professor of mine from the Atmospheric Sciences department at my University.

Well said Ratamacue.

[Lazuris]

The Nobel Peace Prize become worthless once a terrorist leader won it a few years ago. aka Yasser Arafat.

[Mr.Flint]

Global warming isn't a lie. If you have trouble believing it, go talk to someone who has actually done research on the subject.

Also, good for Al Gore.
Global Warming isnt a lie indeed but as it stands now its not exactly the truth.
Man made global warming claim has no consensus
Doom and gloom of global warming has no consensus as well

I wonder what Goracle will use the money for?
A bigger house?
Expanding his business of cheating people to make him richer? oh wait sorry, his carbon trading business
A Church of Global Warming with him as it Prophet?
Another political movie masquerading as scientific truth?

[LMAV]

No, global warming certainly isn't a lie. But there is no scientific consensus on how much of the effect is being induced by man.

There is a lot of debate over if we can do anything in the first place. We just don't know a lot about how our planet works. Hell, they have been predicting strong hurricane seasons for 2 years now!

Some scientists say that even if the planet is warming, that it will be short lived thanks to the coming ice age. In the end, we're just puny humans who don't know jack ****e about this planet. We've only just begone to scratch the surface.

[gilgoul]

Maybe next year, Ahmadinedjhab should get the "global warming nobel prize". If he nukes Israel, and Israel nukes Iran, then we could go on some nuclear winter, thus reducing global warming, and having the polar bears skiing again :)

An explosive maker creating a peace prize after getting rich thanks to WWI, it wasn't the best recipe for credibility from the beginning.

[CG51]

Let's not forget that none of would be on here, for it was Al Gore that gave us the internet!

[budgie]

Good grief, what are they putting in their kippers to reach such a dumb conclusion. The only thing he and his climateers did well was dupe the public with shock TV.

Oh how hilarious. Climateers? Like Mouseketeers, right? I get it. Really witty. And a lot shorter than IslamoClimoHippies to boot. Genius.


Let's not forget that none of would be on here, for it was Al Gore that gave us the internet!

Quotes please

[AgentX]

The Nobel Peace Prize become worthless once a terrorist leader won it a few years ago. aka Yasser Arafat.
And Kissinger even before that.

[daily666]

Global Warming isnt a lie indeed but as it stands now its not exactly the truth.
Man made global warming claim has no consensus
Doom and gloom of global warming has no consensus as well

I wonder what Goracle will use the money for?
A bigger house?
Expanding his business of cheating people to make him richer? oh wait sorry, his carbon trading business
A Church of Global Warming with him as it Prophet?
Another political movie masquerading as scientific truth?

Now, I will state that question again: What the hell does it have to do with World Peace??? If so?

Why Greenpeace haven't recieved it? UN did, Médecins Sans Frontières did.

They gave it to Al Gore, only to show Bush in poor light.

[Weasel]

Now, I will state that question again: What the hell does it have to do with World Peace??? If so?

Why Greenpeace haven't recieved it? UN did, Médecins Sans Frontières did.

They gave it to Al Gore, only to show Bush in poor light.

You don´t see coherences between clobal climate change and peace? How long do you think the poorest people of our planet and naturally the first to suffer will stay peaceful when we flood their residential areas, make desert out of their countries and take away their lifes?

[Snoshi]

You don´t see coherences between clobal climate change and peace? How long do you think the poorest people of our planet and naturally the first to suffer will stay peaceful when we flood their residential areas, make desert out of their countries and take away their lifes?

So.. What did Gore do to prevent it?

[Weasel]

So.. What did Gore do to prevent it?

Use Wikipedia for a first impression.

[AgentX]

So.. What did Gore do to prevent it?
He lost the election.

[Weasel]

He lost the election.

A lot of people aren´t sure about that. p-)

[name already taken]

He lost the election.

You don't have to stay out of the White House to remain a honourable person.

You just have to send the right person.

[SBL]

I think it's ludicrous for any politician to get the Nobel prize, but I guess even scientists have their agenda. Personally, I don't much care if he won it or not, but I don't buy the whole transition from politician to scientific guru. If you buy it, fine, but I'm more interested in how long he hangs around the political scene which is more telling, imo, than anything he can say at this point.

[LRPV]

I don't see him as a politician anymore, but one more pollie that has crossed into the public-speaking circuits to earn his supper. Gore has found his niche with the global warming crowd.

[name already taken]

I don't see him as a politician anymore, but one more pollie that has crossed into the public-speaking circuits to earn his supper. Gore has found his niche with the global warming crowd.
This is a free country even for public figures such as himself.

[LRPV]

This is a free country even for public figures such as himself.

...yes...and my post said otherwise?

[szr]

I don't see him as a politician anymore, but one more pollie that has crossed into the public-speaking circuits to earn his supper. Gore has found his niche with the global warming crowd.
It's pretty well understood in the States that Gore went from simple environmental advocate to environmental crusader overnight, following his defeat in the 2000 election so that he'd have a vehicle to keep his name in the news should he decide for a second try at the White House at a later point.

The Nobel Prize, awarded this year, and not last year or next year, comes at the perfect time to help catapult the kickoff af a Gore '08 campaign. Unfortunately for him, Hillary has practically already run away with the Democratic nomination which is why we may not hear Gore's name thrown into the ring until after the primaries when talk switches to potential VP candidates.

[SBL]

I don't see him as a politician anymore, but one more pollie that has crossed into the public-speaking circuits to earn his supper. Gore has found his niche with the global warming crowd.

If he manages to keep himself more-or-less on the sidelines during the upcoming election, I'll buy your story. I'm not saying you're totally off, but I think his actions in the coming months will be the most telling. He dropped off the face of the earth in 2000 having spent his political credit in the election, now that he's come roaring back with (or is it on?) a new platform and message about saving the world-- I just think it's too good an opportunity for him to pass up.

[name already taken]

...yes...and my post said otherwise?
No, but the thing is he didn't merely find his niche with the global warming crowd, he litteraly created his global warming niche.

That is not to say he created the words "Global Warming" but that he created for himself a niche of drawing attention to the issue.

And of course he also promotes a concept of carbon market working like a stock exchange that looks like the energy market promoted by others that would eventually change money from dollar units to energy units.

And the 1% isn't amused.

[SBL]

No, but the thing is he didn't merely find his niche with the global warming crowd, he litteraly created his global warming niche.



Right. He also invented the internet.:roll:

[LRPV]

It's pretty well understood in the States that Gore went from simple environmental advocate to environmental crusader overnight, following his defeat in the 2000 election so that he'd have a vehicle to keep his name in the news should he decide for a second try at the White House at a later point.

The Nobel Prize, awarded this year, and not last year or next year, comes at the perfect time to help catapult the kickoff af a Gore '08 campaign. Unfortunately for him, Hillary has practically already run away with the Democratic nomination which is why we may not hear Gore's name thrown into the ring until after the primaries when talk switches to potential VP candidates.

OK, I understand the response more clearly now. I'm not deeply familiar with internal US politics and I wasn't aware he still considered himself a 'contender'. Cheers.

[LRPV]

If he manages to keep himself more-or-less on the sidelines during the upcoming election, I'll buy your story. I'm not saying you're totally off, but I think his actions in the coming months will be the most telling. He dropped off the face of the earth in 2000 having spent his political credit in the election, now that he's come roaring back with (or is it on?) a new platform and message about saving the world-- I just think it's too good an opportunity for him to pass up.

Once again, my take on Gore is premised on his tour here. He even referred to himself as the past possible.... I guess I'm not politically astute enough to see a bigger picture. You guys could be spot on, I just saw another political has-been on the dinner circuit. Cheers.

[shocker1]

I am not sure how making a show that stretches the truth and stirs the energy pot makes for a Peace Prize. I will stand by Gore for his work in environmental programs and his support for them. I have met him a few times as a company I worked for in Chattanooga was a focus of his. He has had a huge hand in many electric transit bus programs around the country since the mid 90's that I was a part of. As part of the field engineering team for this company I was part of many dog and pony shows for leaders. He was active with it even out of the spot light so that says something. It is unfortunate that this area of transportation as basically not moved in ten years.

I still fail to see how his movie warranted such praise and bows. Yet Arafat was honored by the Peace Prize so that says it all for that award. Should have given him a couple Hollywood awards for his acting as well.

[Hollis]

A lot of people aren´t sure about that. p-)


The aluminum hat crowd does not count. :bash:

[Hollis]

I still fail to see how his movie warranted such praise and bows. Yet Arafat was honored by the Peace Prize so that says it all for that award. Should have given him a couple Hollywood awards for his acting as well.


Like the Oscar, Michael Moores political fantasy got one for, of all things, a documentary.

That award and the Nobel Peace prize has been reduced to nothing more than political babble.

OH Kerry got a Silver star too...... Amazing how values have no meaning to some. That the ends do justify the means.

Environmental awarness has become like the peace movement, people make a very good living at it. Then they accuse other of Corporate greed... The greedy calling others greedy.

I am still amazed at the Environmental Hollyweird crowd and People like Gore, who use private jets, large home, massive utility bills, I also wonder what their contributions to the trash heeps are?


Hint, Gore's home utility bill is about $33k/year...


But hey, when your rich and famous, the world owe you..... NOT

[cascade]

He's been exposed here in the U.S. as hypocrite and a blatant liar. But now he's recognized as a "peacemaker" i just don't get it. How do people relate so well with a man who could care less about them? :bash:

[Weasel]

He's been exposed here in the U.S. as hypocrite and a blatant liar. But now he's recognized as a "peacemaker" i just don't get it. How do people relate so well with a man who could care less about them? :bash:

Then not a single politician would ever get this prize.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Like the Oscar, Michael Moores political fantasy got one for, of all things, a documentary.


That's a good point - this whole exercise is a lot like the Oscars. A bunch of people sharing common interests and objectives getting together to give each other awards. Woo.

[ElHombre]

I wonder how much of the vitriol that some folks are levelling against Gore is just the realization that the wrong man became President back in '01? :lol:

[Midav]

In all honesty, a lot of things could be equated to being a cause of war. There was a Soccer (Football) war in 1969. Do we start letting the best team in the world win the Nobel Peace Prize? ;)

Don't get me wrong... What Al Gore is doing is a good thing and he should be awarded for what he is doing about Global Warming. Something is happening, whether it is man made, or a cycle of nature and only ignorant people would deny that.

However, I don't see how the Nobel Peace Prize fits in with what Al Gore is doing. There are other people/humanitarians/groups that would be rightfully deserving of the award.

[Bia]

There are other people/humanitarians/groups that would be rightfully deserving of the award.
My neighbor...
he's an older gentleman who he and his wife and very kind to me. They say they're concerned a young lady living alone and all... ;)

He even mows my lawn now for past 2 years and he does it freaking fast! I tried to pay him but he wont hear of it...has one of those mowers that spin on a dime... I think he just likes driving that fkucker!

He also gives me as much deer meat as I could ever want. Jerky too!


Mr. Gary my neighbor for Noble Peace Prize!!!!

[Midav]

My neighbor...
he's an older gentleman who he and his wife and very kind to me. They say they're concerned a young lady living alone and all... ;)

He even mows my lawn now for past 2 years and he does it freaking fast! I tried to pay him but he wont hear of it...has one of those mowers that spin on a dime... I think he just likes driving that fkucker!

He also gives me as much deer meat as I could ever want. Jerky too!


Mr. Gary my neighbor for Noble Peace Prize!!!!

Sounds like he's a good choice. Go Mr. Gary!! ;)

[RICHICOQUI]

http://faustasblog.com/uploaded_images/draftgore-716675.jpg http://faustasblog.com/uploaded_images/11poster[1]-741844.jpg someone notice the pose use the draft gore poster was the same as che:)

[WARPIG]

It's pretty obvious that this award has lost it's credibility long before Al Gore got it. But, it doesn't stop the Nobel organization from using it to make a political statement. I think Al Gore is turning into the white version of Jesse Jackson. Gore may have had a shot at the Presidency at one time.. but his popularity now is comical. He's done a great deal to bring environmentalism into pupular culture. But, the political stupidity that he drags with this is going to do the environmental cause a great deal of harm.

[LMAV]

http://faustasblog.com/uploaded_images/draftgore-716675.jpg http://faustasblog.com/uploaded_images/11poster%5B1%5D-741844.jpg someone notice the pose use the draft gore poster was the same as che:)

Holy crap is that real?


He's done a great deal to bring environmentalism into pupular culture.

I keep hearing this and I just don't buy it. The guy doesn't live by his own mantra, so what good has he really done?

[LaoSexMachine]

"That giant bang you heard last week was the sound of Sean Hannity's head exploding," writes Jeff Giles, a freelance film reviewer, on Rotten Tomatoes (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/inconvenient_truth/news/1680223/) today. Everybody has an opinion about Al Gore and the Nobel Peace Prize, and if you poke around today you'll have a hard time finding a single mind that was changed by it. Those who liked him before are thrilled; those who disliked him before aren't.
William Gray, the noted hurricane forecaster, has long said he doubts there's a human contribution to climate warming, and Steve Lyttle of McClatchy Newspapers quoted him speaking to a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
"We're brainwashing our children," said Gray, 78, a professor at Colorado State University. "They're going to the Gore movie ('An Inconvenient Truth') and being fed all this. It's ridiculous." The full piece is HERE (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003946751_nobelgray13.html).
"We'll look back on all of this in 10 or 15 years and realize how foolish it was," Gray is quoted as saying.
RedState (http://www.redstate.com/blogs/leverkuhn/2007/oct/14/al_gore_deserves_his_nobel_prize_no_really) writes that the peace prize has frequently been given to "some of the most disreputable and discredited characters in history," from Gorbachev to Sadat to Mandela to Jimmy Carter.
"...there’s really only one thing that all of these people and groups have in common. They have not all contributed measurably to world peace, nor have they all benefited humanity in any meaningful way. What they have all done, however, is demonstrate a clear talent for self-promotion. In that respect, Al Gore definitely deserves his Nobel Prize, and he deserves the company he now keeps."
On the other hand there's Paul Krugman (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/opinion/15krugman.html?em&ex=1192593600&en=da7b1a47329aacb0&ei=5087%0A), the Princeton economist and columnist for the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/), who writes today, "The worst thing about Mr. Gore, from the conservative point of view, is that he keeps being right."
As Krugman writes, the Wall Street Journal's editorial Saturday (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119223307015357948.html) didn't even mention Gore's name, instead listing people who "put their own lives and livelihoods at risk by working to rid the world of violence and oppression. Let us hope they survive the coming year so that the Nobel Prize Committee might consider them for the 2008 award."
Finally, it's worth noting that RealClimate.org (http://www.realclimate.org/), which describes itself as "Climate science from climate scientists," has not had a post since the award was announced. I reached one of the contributors to the site, Gavin Schmidt of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (http://www.giss.nasa.gov/), who says not to read anything into that; "We don't regard ourselves as a news site." He says they've been talking about writing something--about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the organization with which Mr. Gore shared the prize.
And their site (http://www.ipcc.ch/) now lists the Nobel under "Other IPCC News."

Science and Society


The Latest Developments in Science and Technology



http://blogs.abcnews.com/scienceandsociety/2007/10/everybody-has-a.html

[Ratamacue]

William Gray, the noted hurricane forecaster, has long said he doubts there's a human contribution to climate warming, and Steve Lyttle of McClatchy Newspapers quoted him speaking to a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
"We're brainwashing our children," said Gray, 78, a professor at Colorado State University. "They're going to the Gore movie ('An Inconvenient Truth') and being fed all this. It's ridiculous."I've met Bill Gray a couple times before. My father used to work with him at Colorado State. Bit of a crotchety old guy but very interesting to talk to. And he's definitely not one to dismiss as some ignorant conservative nut.