Submit your own Neatorama post and vote for others' posts to earn NeatoPoints that you can redeem for T-shirts, hoodies and more over at the NeatoShop!

Did Al Gore Deserve to Win the Nobel Peace Prize?

The 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was just awarded to the International Panel on Climate Change and former US Vice President Al Gore.

The award was "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"

Do you think Al Gore deserved to win the Nobel Peace Prize?

Links: CNN | MSNBC

Hell no!!!!

I have lost all respect for the Nobel Society.

Al Gore is a hypocritical shill, opportunistic bastard and bloated politician..... he is no global warming expert, nor scientist ..... he is a fucking politician, (and a not a very goos one at that)!!!!!!

assChump Extremist!!!!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Yes and no...though it's shared with the IPCC and they certainly deserve it, so I don't find much point in discussing whether he deserves it or not.

Twitchings, you mean you didn't lose all respect for the Nobel Society when Mother Theresa won the peace prize? By comparison this is nothing.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Absolutely not, but this isn't the first time the peace prize was given to entirely the wrong person. It happens basically every year.

His film is LOADED with blatant factual errors, exaggerations, and drama. If you want to know what the world thinks about climate change you can read the UN report. His film doesn't even compare. Science does not support his film.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Even if his forte doesn't lie in practicing what he's preaching, I think that he deserves the prize for simply elevating the issue of climate change to the national consciousness.

It's also "Nobel" that he's donating all of his award money to the IPCC. (Sorry for the pun...)
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Regardless of people's personal notions of Al Gore the person, his getting the word out about global warming is admirable. The concept of global warming, formally the "greenhouse effect", was relegated to the fringes of hippiedom. And also to actual scientists, who apparently are about as revered as hippies these days. Regular folks at least know about it now. But unfortunately many still infuse research findings with their own somewhat soap operatic opinions about the folks who are presenting the findings. Global warming, to many, is a crock simply because they don't like Al Gore. But kudos to him for trying. As for his detractors: Hey, understanding that we're in the midst of a human-generated climate change that's going to be catastrophic for all the world's economies, food and water supplies, and the total amount of livable land on earth doesn't mean you're a fan of Al Gore. He and global warming are two different things.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Absolutely not. I agree with Twitchings on this one, he has been cited for having a very large carbon footprint with his large home (ahem Mansion McFortress) and justifies it by saying that he contributes to carbon offsetting (a big dumb idea, basically the guilt ridden white rich spend money so they can still point fingers at others for being polluting and be self righteous), how much dirty energy does it take to power an auditorium with his projectors and sound, how much carbon is released by the throngs of the ideological cattle (who probably voted for Bush the first time around but then realized that it wasn't hip, so they decided to be "green" at a last ditch effort to be accepted and relevent to our reactionary youth culture while driving their cars to his performance - I'm sorry, very important speech that you can buy on dvd), finally - how much money and prestige (a shiny medal forged in a foundry that probably uses coal/fossil fuels - now he has another carbon footprint to offset) does he stand to make (and has made)from this tripe and from saying that same stupid line over and over and over, "Hi, I'm Al Gore and I used to be the next president (cue stupid thoughtless agreeing laughter). Sorry, this made me angry for some reason, but come on people - he is not a hero, a pop culture icon maybe, but hero/visionary, nahhhhh.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
How is this a "neat" topic? In the context of this site, shouldn't this post title be "Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize" rather than gaging the audience in a mud-slinging contest.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Did HE even think he deserve it? He accepted it on behalf of the scientists who did the work, and hightailed it out of there after 5 minutes.

Weather he deserved it or not, it was appropriate to give it to him. He's a highly recognizable face, and he has put a lot of serious and honest effort into getting the word out. The prize does more good for global warming if it's given to the "face" of the advocacy group as a whole. There are even more eyes then ever on the issue.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
On second thought. I can't really think of anyone better to get it this year. The worlds been a little dry in that department lately.

It's also true that he did "get the word out," but the word was already out. He just exaggerated it into some nightmare catastrophic Waterworldian prophecy that the UN report doesn't support. Hey, it worked, people got conscious of the problem I guess... they just all think it's worse than it likely is. As for him not claiming to be a scientist, well, that's a no-brainer, but people look to him as a sort of authority on climate change, and they should not.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I think given that a British judge just ruled that the Inconvenient Truth DVD cannot be shown in classrooms there without also showing a significant disclaimer that illustrates 9 specific items in the film are outright falsehoods, that the film shows only one side of the 'controversy and is highly political, no way should Gore be given a peace prize.

And as former Poland President Lech Walesa pointed out, what does this have to do with peace?

It's political. It's ridiculous. It's alarmism. It's hype.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Why doesn't any of these comments actually discuss whether he deserves the PEACE prize? If you think it great he has brought climate change to the forefront...what has that got to do with peace? And if you think he's a hypocritical politician...again, what has that got to do with peace?

Personally, I don't think the panel should have won it because it doesn't strike me as a tangible peace effort. My initial reaction was that it did seem more of a political statement.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I don't think he should have won because it diminishes the achievements of those who received the Peace award in the past - people whose works, by and large, were aimed at actual 'peace' or in the very least remained truer to Nobel's wish that the award go ' '... to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses'

While the Nobel group has stretched that definition somewhat over the years, it completely ignores it with the award to Gore.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
It is very egotistical to presume we control the earth's weather. Should we try to reduce emissions, yes, curtail pollution, yes. But, all this hysteria is a joke. I wonder if the native Americans sat smoking their peace pipes around a campfire in Yosemite wringing their hands about how they are causing the glaciers to melt.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Hell no! it should go to Bush and Cheny and all of the Republican party for ridding the world of that huge terrorist problem and for making sure Americans are SCARED like they should be. Not to mention for taking away basic human rights of americans and expanding an ever increasing gap of fear based hatred for the simple differences that make up the beauty of the Human race. Gore would NEVER do anything POSITIVE for the world like INSTALLING FEAR into his beloved country. He'd do some left wing RADICAL Liberal crap like EDUCATE people. HOW DARE HE!!!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
What did Al Gore do for PEACE again? It seems like a stretch to give him the award for what he has done, like him or not. Global warming, while an important issue does not DIRECTLY affect the peace of our planet. Also his work has, to be blunt, been a failure. Locate on a globe the country(s) whose CO2 emissions have decreased or held study because of Al Gore. He has changed nothing, because he offers no practical solutions.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Ya, and I think the people who were on about global cooling in the 70's, overpopulation in the 80's, the ozone hole and the attack of the killer bees in the 90's, etc.

Guys. It's a business. The more you can ring the alarm bell, the more grants you can get and the more money you can make.

If Al Gore deserves a nobel prize, it should be for his business savy and ability to sucker a bunch of people into some B.S. manmade global warming scheme.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Well, he thinks he is doing the right thing, but so do many people who think they are doing the right thing... for peace.
This discussion led me to review all of the past recipients, and I came to realize, that Gore and the panel may be the first to ever win for reasons other than those relating directly to peace.

And why are people bringing up Bush and Foxnews? WTF relevance do those topics have here?

Stick to the topic guys.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Hell no, of course not. Even the British courts are starting to rule that his film and all of his soap-boxing are based on a hoax.

That sycophantic gasbag is just trying to stay relevant after he was drummed out of American politics. Seven years ago, I thought the world would be better off if he had been elected.

Al Gore has now single-handedly changed my mind about his competency in global politics.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Of course he is a poor choice for the award! Man-influenced global climate change is a hoax; it's only a pity that it will take a couple of hundred years of harmful policy misdirection and handicapping of Western economies for this to become evident.

I will give it to Gore, though. Unlike some who purely seek profit from the scare, but know it to be hokum, Gore really believes this stuff. I honestly think he is sincere, but he frankly overestimates his own comprehension of science. He thinks he technologically "hip" and informed about environmental matters because he subscribes to Scientific American & knows Bono. He doesn't seem to understand the basics of scientific inquiry, though, and that's the first step to being a real scientist.

As others have pointed out, it's most amusing that he justifies his own excesses through his purchase and advocacy of carbon indulgences. His arrogance belies that he thinks he is better than the rest of us.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
sure he deserves this meaningless liberal award. just like all the hollywood dummies deserve the ones they give themselves. hope he is happy he got the same award as jimmah carter and wacker arofat got.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Well he might be well intended. but he stretched the truth in the documentary. If you do that, you lose credibility and ruins any good he might have done.

Also how is this relate to peace award. How did he promote peace with this?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
What the hell does this have to do with Neatorama's purpose? It's already become bloated enough with mediocre posts as is. The last thing it needs is political discussion threads.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
First of all,

Global warming doesn't matter.

Thirty years ago, the big environmental issue was global chilling. Everyone said that the world was going into another ice age and they were all full of shit.

This is just history repeating itself and Al Gore is just a profiteer.

Plus, Gandhi didn't even get a Nobel Prize - so fuck this whole idea.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)

While there were errors with his film he completely raised awareness to a new level. As others have pointed out. However, this has been one of Gore's primary objectives for most of his political career. Which he pats himself on the back for over and over again in the film.

I did not vote for Gore, (I won't say who) as I began to doubt him during his crumbling stature through through the debates. However I absolutely would have, had I known more of him. There is an absolutely wonderful short documentary on Gore and his family that Spike Jonze made and never officially released. These 13 minutes could have meant a different world had he'd done differently. As is, I believe it is only available on McSweeny's 'Wholphin' DVD magazine. (worth it in itself)

The Doc entails Spike coming to Gore's home and then following him to North Carolina for a weekend family vacation, in which we see the former Vice President body surfing. It's an intimite and humanizing view of a man who was ruined by standing still. I recomend to anyone who took the time to comment here, especially those who voted no with generic and hallow statements indicating why.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Yes, Al Gore deserved it.

Peace indeed. Many wars are about resources (oil, water etc.). Wait until climate change gets even worse, the wars will intensify.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
What Al Gore did was already proposed by other men way before he was even born.

Al Gore was just the guy who made a big show of the whole debate on global warming... I never watched his movie "An Inconvenient Truth" ( but I will in about 25 minutes ) and I doubt that he really add anything convenient or more convincing to the whole debate in his movie.

Live Earth was a joke... it was more of a partay then a concert and it didn't really made anyone learn anything new about our situation with the climate change. "It's getting hot on planet earth." was the central message I guess.

If Al Gore is not a political puppet I dont know what a political puppet is.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Wow, I'm shocked at the number of naysayers out there regarding climate change. How many scientists need to say that:

1) Climate is changing due to an increase in CO2 levels.
2) Humans are the primary cause for the change in CO2 levels.

before you pull your heads out of the sand and see what's going on? It's not like there's any significant scientific debate on the issue any longer.

So yeah, I think he deserves it. If we allow climate change to continue it can and will cause destabilization around the world, and war. A stable climate will do a great deal for Peace.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Isn't there a separate SCIENCE category? Oh, wait -- he's not a scientist, just a talking head.

This is nothing but political hot air from the left-leaning Nobel committee.

I suppose he's in good company with Arafat and Carter.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)

Hell no!!!!

I have lost all respect for the Neatorama.

Twitchings is a hypocritical shill, opportunistic bastard and bloated internet idiot….. he is no global warming expert, nor scientist ….. he is a fucking blog commentor, (and a not a very goos one at that)!!!!!!

assChump Extremist!!!!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
When I saw that he was given the Nobel I was in utter shock. Sure, "Global Warming" is something that we should be concerned about but Al Gore turned it into something way more dramatic than it needed to be. Did you know that 30 years ago the same hoots who are screaming Global Warming now were worried about another Ice Age?! Have you people ever read history books? The weather ebbs and flows and we are in a warm spout right now but it'll get cooler again.

Also get the facts from the real scientists in their entire context. Take a look at the links on this web page:

It will tell you that the majority of people do not agree with Gore on this topic like he says they do. It'll also tell you that the human contribution to the 'Global Warming' is closer to like 5% of the total carbon emissions in the world.

As said before, why doesn't he do more to lessen his own Carbon Emissions? He should take an example from Leo and get a Prius.. better yet, buy the new car from Tesla Motors.. 100% Electric car. Everyone go buy one for that fact (well, wait for the $30k version to come out).

I'm not saying that Global Warming isn't real. I'm just saying that it is extremely blown out of proportion and that given time the earth will naturally cool again. Until then I am completely in support of renewable energy sources and fewer green house gas emissions. I do admit that the "Global Warming" COULD be an issue in several thousands of years.. But we'll all be gone by then.

Stupid move by the Nobel committee. Or was it a smart move in their favor? It's all political anyways.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
hahahaha, no scientific evidence to support the movie?
Go drive your pos hummer right wingers, maybe go off the beaten path and read something besides "Focus on the Family"
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Yes, and the numerous ice ages and warming periods the last 600 million years were also caused by humans and their emissions of CO2.

The "peace" prize has lost all credibility.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I sure hope that wasn't directed at me Luke. I never said there wasn't any scientific evidence in his movie. There's plenty of scientists reporting the way that Al Gore wanted it to be reported.

I absolutely am a Right Wing Conservative and if I had a Hummer (a real hummer, not the sissy H2/3) you bet your bottom dollar I'd be driving it. Instead I'm relatively poor and drive a 4cyl S-10 and Aveo.. Quite the carbon emitting vehicles! Oh and my tractor that I use to take care of my field, I'm going to be converting it over to be run off bio-diesel.. not because of the carbon emissions but because it's so much cheaper.

And I love Focus on the Family.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
No way. As my friend put it:

Regardless of your stance on global warming, how can you justify giving the nobel PEACE Prize to someone for their work on a subject that will do absolutely nothing in the struggle for worldwide peace? Global Warming is not a threat to any sort of peace except the peace of mind of people who buy Humvees. This is like giving the Gold Medal in the olympic pole vault to Stephen King because he wrote a really good book on gardening.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
My, my, my.

I would have to disagree and say, yes, this is a neat topic, in as much has this is still the FIRST article on the neatorama page and there are over 40 comments posted. Also, I disagree on how Al Gore never gave us options on what to DO for the environment. The movie just gave evidence that we need to do something, his books give us plenty of how-to's.

Remember books? If people read more, maybe he wouldn't have had to make a movie.

So, yes, I would have to say that he deserved the peace prize. You know, having promoted fraternity between nations. Kyoto anyone? Many of our nations are now fighting a common enemy: ourselves, and our pollution.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Global Warming is not a threat to any sort of peace except the peace of mind of people who buy Humvees.

Except that a great many conflicts in the world are due to scarcity of natural resources, and global warming will only exacerbate that. A stable climate is a GREAT thing for world peace.

As far as the "natural cycle" folks go, Gore addresses that, as does the IPCC. We're well outside the bounds of natural cycles. I'm sorry, but I'm going to put more trust in an international panel of scientists, especially when they're in consensus, over some Schnitt radio/internet personality.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
No I don't think he deserved it, he was on the way to getting it but because hes a 'recognizable' face it made it a whole lot easier, like flying into his money filled lap easier...
and did someone bag on Mother Teresa? Not cool, even the fact that she questioned and was wary of her faith at times she was an amazing force for humanity. Joan d'Arc did exactly the same thing, and whose to say that Mother Teresa wasn't victim to a trail of fire, everyday saw new adversities thrown her way.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Schnitt isn't the guy who wrote that stuff. He just has a collection of other information on his site. Just because I see articles on Neatorama, doesn't mean that Neatorama wrote every article on the page.

Many of the videos are documents on his page have statements from scientists in the IPCC who are stating that they do not agree with Al Gore and are tired of being mixed in with the people who are, just because they are also a part of the IPCC.

I'm serious, watch the first 3 videos in those links and you will see what I'm talking about. Or don't. It all depends on if you want to walk the walk, or just talk it.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
This on "Gorebal Warning" from Boi from Troy:

Bush Ties Peace Prize Record

With the selection of the International Committee on Climate Change and Al Gore, Jr., for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, President Bush has moved into the record book for most Peace Prizes awarded to Americans during their presidency.

His Presidency is tied with three others for most Americans winning the Award!

Previous American Presidents to share multiple peace prizes during their Presidency were Ronald Reagan, Richard M. Nixon and…Herbert Hoover.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
@ Emily and others who say:

"Global Warming is not a threat to any sort of peace"

Global warming is caused by humankind's dependence on fossil fuels like coal and oil, and our unsustainable use of these fuels.

We fight wars for these fuels.

And, when the climate gets bad enough, we'll fight wars for that, too.

You're incredibly naive.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
wow, there are a lot of opinions on this topic. My input may be redundant, but I have to say that Al Gore absolutely does not deserve this award or any of the others that he's whored himself out for in the past year.
He's a climate based Mcarthyist, and a complete hypocrite. Any kool aid drinking liberal out there reading this should read the UN report on climate change. Gore is a pathetic attention whore.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I’m going to put more trust in an international panel of scientists, especially when they’re in consensus, over some Schnitt radio/internet personality.

That's laughable; the only "consensus" is from those who've bought into the theory and have the most to gain from it.

Inconvenient Truth was found to have at least eleven material inaccuracies in it on matters that Gore claimed to be Gospel truth. In most places that qualifies him as a liar. That alone ought to have kept him out of the running for the Nobel.
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 the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
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 real inconvenient truth is that Gore is full of it.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Wow, I knew when I saw the title there would be a lot of comments, but this was crazy!

I just wanted to make a few comments.
I'm assuming number 55 the truth will set you free wanted to link you to the website, but messed up. I found it at who's slogan is "exposing and combating the liberal media bias"... enough said

Anyways he copies and pastes the article basically word for word (hence the bold).

Also, it was 9 points the court took issue with not 11. I also love the way he slants the answers to make it seem like there is no way they could be true.

The truth is yeah some of these things are bogus like the polar bear story, but most of the problems are simply from the incredible complexity of Global Warming.

The anti-global warming crowd likes to forget that the judge is allowing the film to be shown in public schools and that no credible scientist is denying man made global warming. It's just that the specifics are difficult to pin down exactly.

Just because there are some issues with his documentary doesn't make his other points any less true.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I think ex-VP Al Gore deserves it.
Climate change poses more threats to the global community. It might even spark wars between nations in their race of getting remaining resources.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Yes!... In a world bereft of heros, we turn to the poor substitutes of pop singers and men who play ball well. I think that Mr. Gore is a hero in a true sense of the word, heroic in vision, heroic in his involvement. He could do or be many things that would benefit him more financially, but he conducts himself as a citizen of the world in matters of politics, environmental matters, technology, education, and economics.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
For everyone who can't imagine a link between climate and peace, I'll quote from the Nobel citation: "Extensive climate changes may alter and threaten the living conditions of much of mankind. They may induce large-scale migration and lead to greater competition for the earth's resources. Such changes will place particularly heavy burdens on the world's most vulnerable countries. There may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states."
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Those inaccuracies are mostly extrapolations that can't be proven, a few mistakes, and even one truth that was simply stated in a confusing matter. I was horrified when I first read here that the movie was riddled with lies...after reading about the lies...I am not horrified.

Although the fact that Gore won a "peace" prize for something which does not directly correlate to the peace process, I think it's legitimate that he was awarded the prize for raising awareness about global warming. Which is real...and important enough to merit a broadening of the definition of "peace"


It does suck that Gandhi never got it.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Chris says: "There is no longer any scientific debate on the issue [of 'man made' global warming]."

Clearly, Chris, you are not a scientist. And, as I am (credentials upon request), I must ask that you cease in spreading your BS.

Much thanks,
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Actually, while on the subject...

If anyone has a credible (peer reviewed) link with evidence that either:
a) Man is the leading cause of CO2 emissions,
b) CO2 in the atmosphere is causing "climate change," (formerly referred to as 'global warming'), please link them here.

As I am sure most of you with a bit of related education know, there are no such undisputed, scientific findings.

Again, Chris, et. al, this whole issue is politics.
Nothing more.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Billy J are you serious?

I'm not trying to flame you, but I don't think you could even find a credible peer reviewed scientific paper on global warming that didn't say that. Unless you look at old research.

Also, to access these Peer reviewed journals where these studies are published you often have to subscribe to it, or be a college student (which allows you to access it through the library website).

But yeah, I would be astounded if you could find a reputable scientific study done recently that said man isn't responsible for the majority of CO2 emissions and that increased CO2 in the atmosphere doesn't cause global warming.

PS: There are a few internet journals out there, but their studies aren't peer reviewed by the scientific community at large and more often than not they aren't even specialists in the field.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
It's amazing how a little disinformation thrown onto the internet can proliferate so broadly. That disinformation has been thrown out there by scientists with dubious connections to climatology and definite connections to the oil and coal industry. In fact, "Big Oil" has actually been paying (mostly industry) scientists to publish work which denies global climate change.
Global Warming've been snookered. Oil & coal companies put this stuff out there to protect their profits, regardless of the truth.

ALL of the papers compiled within the IPCC report are peer-reviewed:
Read the actual report. It answers all the questions about variability of the sun's radiation, past climatic fluctuations, temperature measurement regimens (urban heat island), etc. All that smokescreen stuff which was thrown out by the oil companies is answered here.

Want more peer review? Here's a report requested by Congress and issued last year by the National Academy of Sciences:
As peer review goes, it probably doesn't get much more complete or distinguished than the Nat'l Academy of Sciences.

Al Gore got some stuff wrong on "An Inconvenient Truth". He was operating off of earlier studies...some study results which were later discounted as being too alarmist & too fast (mainly Greenland Ice Sheet melting). But his persistent drumbeat may actually be bringing the truth rising to the top. For bringing the issue forward in this truly global matter, the Nobel Peace Prize is entirely appropriate.

Here are a couple of new links, too...and they're about actual climatolologists, not oil industry shills:
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
An Inconvenient Truth is just one of the things Al Gore has done to deserve the prize, but he is just the celebrity face behind the research. but if there's one thing the world needs it's knowledge of how we're abusing it, and he's spreading that word all of the time.
An Inconvenient Truth had some artistic spin to it that was probably there to get the masses hearts stirred, if all of the facts werent correct it doesnt stop the fact that global warming IS happening and 'some' people are bringing it to the forefront of our attention (hint)
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
#66, Billy J - you are looking for 'undisputed' scientific findings.

Cigarettes causing cancer is disputed. Evolution (micro and macro) is disputed. The spherical shape of the earth is disputed. The moon landings are disputed. The holocaust is disputed.

Why is 'undisputed' so important to you flat-earthers?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Justin wrote:
"the judge is allowing the film to be shown in public schools".

Here in Tampa there is a school that didnt inform parents of this and found out afterwards that their kids are being shown the movie and it's being taught as fact.

That bothers me because they again are only showing 1 side of the story to these kids who will believe anything a teacher will tell them.

It's wrong unless they show both sides, which they don't because then they'd possibly be proven wrong and we can't have that. No siree.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The burden of proof lies not in disproving, but in proving a theory. This is true as much in science as it is in the legal system.
Unlike the moon landing and smoking-caused cancer, there is substantial evidence on BOTH sides of the climate change arena. This lends the scientific community to either gather more substantial evidence, or leave this idea under the category of "theory."

As for the name calling ("flat-earthers?"), it is completely unnecessary and destroys your credibility.

I completely understand that many of you buy into what the media tells you, but in this case, you should all do a little 'open-minded' research, and read evidence from both sides.

As this issue has somehow become political (although it is unclear as to why), every scientist with an opposing view has been pushed to the back-burner for people like Gore.

I must move on to other (newer) threads elsewhere, so I leave this forum with a Newsweek article supporting climate change:

So, there is no denying it: climate change is a real and immediate danger (and it is also clear why 'global warming' has been dropped for a more inclusive term).

Good day to you all.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
If you've made it this far, and are still reading, congratulations!

I think there is climate change. I think humanity is leaving an effect on the world. I don't know if it's as dramatic as people like Al Gore would have us believe. There is so much debate either way.

He won this prize as Poster Boy for his cause. Did he simply adopt a cause to espouse, or is he sincere? I don't know.

The Peace Prize seems like an odd one to give out for this - they couldn't give him a Pulitzer...?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
this is pure politics, with Swedes injecting themselves into the American presidential race in an attempt to influence our position in the Middle East and the Republican agenda. It isn't lost on them that Gore symbolizes Clinton and his wife serving as a stand-in for his campaign for a third term Presidency (or didn't you realize that?).
The theory that preventing global warming (if that is even possible) will somehow prevent certain wars of the future is specious at best.

"There may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states.” Tell you what- I won't declare war on Russia, you give me the Peace prize next year. This has only diminished thwe prestige of those winners of the past who truly deserved it, a very sad result.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
And I say State of Fear by Michael Crichton for those who still believe in Global Warming

Its actually called 'Climate Change' and its gonna with it.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
'sup folks? Well, gotta love crisp cool Saturday afternoons in of life's simple joys. Couple things to opine on today. First, this fiasco out in San Fran.....the gay folks invading a Catholic service. Very, very offensive if you've caught some of the footage....which you probably haven't since our friendly neighborhood liberal mass media has buried the story. If some radical Catholics made of mockey of a Jewish or Muslim service it would be front page news, a national story and labeled as a hate crime. Couple questions: where are the Reverends Al and Jesse? Where's the ACLU? Where are the camera crews that were all over the Jena 6? Where are the liberal pundits who sacked Don Imus? No parades or rallies in support of Catholics? Humph....what can made of their absence? Does it tip a hand as to their agenda? Food for thought.

Second, we the hell are we in such a rush? Everyone in this society is in a huge hurry....quicker, faster, quicker, faster, more efficient, time is money, don't waste time, quickly, I can't wait in line........Look at the way people drive and people talk. Look at the yuppie who has to wear an ear piece cell phone into the store to buy bread and milk. Is he that important that he may need to be reached while paying the cashier before returning to his car within the next 90 seconds. Maybe he thinks he is. High speed this, faster that....don't waste time, be more effiencient. THANK YOU CORPORATE AMERICA, YOU'VE TRAINED US WELL.

My anything sacrificed by this way of thinking and behaving? Perhaps patience and the ability to stop and smell the roses? Are personal relationships damaged? Do people feel less connected and more like a piece of retail commodity? Do conversations feel transactional? Seems like it's a huge badge of honor to always be on the run, always be busy.....don't have time to visit family, brothers and sisters, old friends, Mom and Dad, Grandma and Grandpa.....Well, how important can those things actually be? Let's just wait 6 more months until Christmas and miss out on the actual life that happens in between....let's just grow more distant....after all we can wait until there there is a crises, spend a few days understanding what's really imporant, pledge to change, and then get back to being busy, wearing our cell phone earpieces(that make us look like some cyborg creation out of Star Wars) and then let's get back to our 60 hours work works, endless company traveling, going global and learning how to be more politically correct since our fortune 500 company preaches diversity and inclusion.

Just some food for thought. Stay local, not global. Peace.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
One of the other nominees was a 97 year old woman who saved about 2,500 Jewish kids from concentration camps in World War II. Unfortunately, she didn't have a snazzy Power Point demonstration.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
#75 BIlly J - Actually, they only proved that cigarettes cause cancer about 10 years ago. Before that it was simply correlation.

In the meantime, thousands died, because the flat-earthers (the cigarette companies and smokers) wanted irrefutable evidence.

I know people (including other scientists) are resistant to changes in scientific thinking, history has shown that again and again.

Nitpicking delays acceptance of reality.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Nobel Peace Prize: NEW Global Warming Antiperspirant

AP – Al Gore has for a long time been full of hot air. He has a vivid imagination about the world around him. His strong commitment, reflected in political activity, lectures, films and books, has strengthened the struggle against climate change. Al’s basic mistrust of the seasons may stem from an episode of the Twilight Zone, in which the Earth gets too close to the Sun. Summers are hot & sticky, and Gore is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures needed to create a more effective global deodorant.

If former college roommate, Tommy Lee Jones, could save the City of Los Angeles from an errant volcano, and the world from a giant cockroach in Men In Black, then certainly big Al Gore deserves a prize for his Global Warming Antiperspirant Initiative to control perspiration, and prevent the meltdown of Earth. Now, you too can use the same effective ingredients and trusted formula that kept our leaders dry during the Cold War. As the planet heats up, you don’t have to! Clinton tested: guaranteed to leave no trace:
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
No, he has not done anything to improve world peace.
Perhaps if they invented a new category called "Nobel Environment Prize" or something.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Peace Prize? Even in this blog all people are doing is arguing about what he has to say. Nothing peaceful about that.

I don't know of any countries that laid down their weapons because Mr. Gore said it got hotter by a degree.

I agree the climate is changing...but it always has been. I agree that this time humans may even play a large role in it. So? Who's to say that the current average temperature is the best one? Maybe 2 or 3 degrees warmer would mean more bountiful crops. We came out of the little ice age just a couple hundred years ago. Guess what got us out of it? GLOBAL WARMING. I don't think anyone was complaining then.

The oceans may rise a foot....they may rise 5 feet. It's not going to be a huge wall of water flowing in like a tsunami. It's pretty easy. Pick up your umbrella and beach towel and move back. About a foot a year should do it. I think we can manage that pace.

If you own a home on the beach....well, give me a break. You probably paid a 200% premium for having it there. You can afford to move.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Click here to access all of this post's 90 comments
Email This Post to a Friend
"Did Al Gore Deserve to Win the Nobel Peace Prize?"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.


Success! Your email has been sent!

close window

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
Learn More