Gore wins Nobel Peace Prize

Post Reply New Topic

you mean convincing millions of people that there is a big problem ahead of us which can't be put aside is equal to doing 'nothing' ?

i remember how it is already clear for some time that something was going wrong with the C0²,
but ordinary people who don't ask themselves questions and don't analyse their own behaviours didn't know, or only very vaguely.
Al Gore has changed that, he has made the subject clear, has put a worldwide spotlight on it, and that is a good thing, a vital act.

talking about his own actings, his style or whatever has nothing to do with it, it might be interesting as a sidediscussion, but it is not the mainpoint.

i also hope that there are more of this initiatives, we'll need it in order to safe our world.

well, Joybob, you know it takes a skilled carpenter to build a barn, but it only takes a jackass to try to kick it down.

A vital act indeed. But winning a noble prize now already? What has actually been done since then? Nothing, totally nothing, even less than nothing. Most people (read all noble prize winners till today) fought for their prize, 'gave their life' for research, said earth-shaking things. What did Al Gore? He said some things, not one thing new to me, still living his easy life, he himself being a waister of nature, and wins The Prize. I think it's a total schandal. He's popular, and therefore he wins a prize, not for doing something totally new to the world, or showing he's done his very, very best to better the world. Merely to better the content of his wallet.

While the citizens of a town in Colombia, that all their life donot want to be a part of the civil-war surrounding them, that continue to use no fighting, while indeed under attack of their own government AND the 'fighters for freedom', the guerilla, do not. It's a shame that Al Gore, a populist with no new views, wins a prize for Peace for chist sake instead of these people that give their lifes for a good cause.

Yup, he won the Nobel Peace Prize, just like the Current Dali Lama and Martin Luther King. So. . I suppose it is not up to ourselves to be the arbitrator of where the Committee of Alfred Nobel to second guess where the prize SHOULD go?

Obviously the Committee doesn't have the same criteria as some do,
Did you know the Kyoto Accords were falling apart until he came in in 1997 being a big Wonder Bread built strong bodies 12 ways American man coming in bursting with American bonhomie, pumping hands and including everyone into the best of being an American? Remember when being an American was a proud thing? Some people like what America was. I know I used to!

The Committee heard of him slowly building his case for global warming by years and years of Al, after winning the popular vote of 2000 taking his PowerPoint presentation from college campus to Library conference room to hotel ballroom, building relationships around the world. In stead of whining about the decision, or raising a stink he so obvously could, he created something marvelous all around the world. http://www.liveearth.org/

I am not sure if people reason if they dislike the man they can ignore the man's message. This is what it boils down to it seems.

After all, it's not like they made him a Saint!

I know hat he did for the kyoto-protocol. Does the protocol work? No, it's far too weak.
Of course, Al Gore did it for the good cause and couldn't know it wouldn't work out. He talked to others and persuaded them to believe in the greenhouse-effect. That's a good cause, yes, but all he did was put some already known information together, tell it in a very populistic way and make a movie on it. And, be fair, did he change a lot of things? Not really. There are still political fights to get the North-Pole-oil, still no country that'll keep their promises they made for the Kyoto-protocol, no president that really, really, really wants to change their energy-policies.
Yes, he did bring a 'green morale' to the people of the world. But the green morale didn't change anything. They still drive SUV's, heat their houses far too high up and donot isolate their houses. 'It's so bad what's happening' and at the same time they ruin the world themselves. There should happen so much more to make the world a better place, and only if that works out, he should win the Noble Prize. Not now already. It's far too early.

too early or too late that the question ...

Gore could have done a lot of things. He does have a name. He could have been a big politcal player, he came very close to the top.

He did not take to wearing bark and eating cold raw food, but he did turn all of his personal credit over to science, and the UN, for the good of the world, and most important, the future.

Global problems I first read about when The Club of Rome published in the mid fifties. It was post war, post colonial, and they took a clear look. Most of what they said came to pass. Back then there were 2 billion people? In 2040, 11? 16? there is not enough fresh water, soils are depleted, the oceans are almost dead.

We are because of our past, we were left a world, knowledge, something to pass on. We behave like bad parents children grow up to hate.

AIDs in Africa, Flu in Asia, we have learned are everyone's problems.

I do not agree with the whole science of global warming, it is just a scare story, the history of the last few thousand years is, it is getting colder. In the year 400 Scotland grew grapes and was known for their wine, in the year 1200, the little ice age, the north coast of Scotland was covered in ice year round. The Vikings came south in 900 because it became to cold for them to raise crops.

The little ice age passed, and humans had nothing to do with it. The amount of energy involved is huge, far beyond humans.

What is important is life, all of it, trees, grass, hold the soil, clean the air and water. What took millions of years to form can be gone forever with one clearcutting. Something will come back, but not the productive.

It is a lack of political will on the part of the people that lets the National Forest be sold, and the taxpayer foot the bill for the roads to reach it. Those who want the timber, the wealth, have more ways than those who would keep it. We have talked about this for a long time, the forests were all cut.

Global Warming is a farie tale, so is religion, but useful sometimes.

We will all die, what we do does affect the future, since I will be dead, I do not care about humans, but I would like the hummingbirds to survive.

What would hundred mile wide strips of nature cost, reaching from the Arctic to the tropics? A hundred miles of every plant, animal, a path for the birds, with food and water. When we are gone they can have it all, and we will be gone. We are only a species, most last about five million years, our age.

Is this the reason species end? They destroy their habitat? Most only take out themselves, and those who ate them. We could take out all of life.

Keeping the planet alive means lying to humans?

Global warming is causing rats to grow to ten foot, and your skin will peel off within five years.

The truth is, your children will have nothing to eat but you.

Global Warming is such a nice way to say it.

I think we should all be in favor of that lie, rather than the other lie.

when I was a little aspie child, I couldn't walk very well. My calf muscles were stretched tight across my bones and I walked on the balls of my feet. Somehow this made my arms and hands look like I was picking up a long gown and I lurched forward with a look of great concentration on my face, my tongue stuck out of a very determined mouth.
By the time I was 7 or 8, this behavior was quite debilitating and I met a wonderful physical therapist that I actually wanted to emulate who inspired me and the other staggerers and lurchers that were in the same therapy. I watched how she walked and made her my model of how I wanted to be.
Did it work the first time? no. Did it work the next time? no, but it was a little better. Years went by and I was walking better and better and Miss Scantland was long ago in my past, but her image of her taking me under her wing and inspiring me to continue went on and on.

I don't drive a SUV. I don't over heat my house, I wear sweaters. Sheryl Crowe said "you should only use ONE SQUARE of toilet paper" and I laughed because she had never seen the size of my a**! But you know. . . I use less TP now because she got me to THINKING about what I was doing.
I now sort out my trash into recyclables, paper and 'trash', I take the bus or my bike for shorter trips.

You see, I do what I can, and I have let people like Al Gore inspire me to be more conscious about the environment that both you and I share. I don't think my life is any less abundant by being responsible.

And especially it is no skin off MY nose that Al Gore wins some Norwegian honor for his work making me personally aware of how my behaviour affects the world I live in.
And as for his personal life. . .the last I heard, The Nobel Peace Prize is not Sainthood. i can no more vouch for his behaviour than I can vouch for those people that can't be bothered to change.


Merle

I may be on the unpopular side of the topic here but man made global warming is a hoax, the earth shifts it weather patterns on it's own, as far as I'm concerned the "proof" of global catastrophe is BS, pardon me for not trusting something that does only what the information it's given tells it to. (computer simulations) my other issue being that we are giving ourselves as a species way too much credit.

It's like we've thrown away thousands of years of proven science because some idiot makes alarmist claims and the reason the planet gets hotter was discovered by ancient Greece they may have been debauched but they weren't uneducated and made the simple discovery 'the suns closer thus its hotter, it's solar waves that controls our atmosphere our planet is essentially the slave to the cosmic events around us. contrary to what people wit ha political agenda wnat you to think.

Blasphemy. Heretic!

Does it really matter if global warming is man made? Is that really the point?

considering that people believing it's man made Affects a proven and stable Rescource yes it does. I'm all for alternative energy to a degree but I'm highly against forgetting Oil and coal entirely or making it secondary, the weather, like solar patterns the wind aren't the most reliable, hydrogen yeah lets pack a bunch of mini hindenburg's into a parking lot. And the idea we're significant enough species to effect the planet with our implied meddling seems a bit arrogant.

actually, the lack of coal and oil will be it's own reality eventually, unless we are not around to dig the rest of it out.

it will take multiple milenia to run out of oil and coal if not way more as mining technology progresses so do way ot find it. in all honesty you seem to listen to Greenpeace way too much when it's founding VP quits agnowledging it's become a political orginization and not an environmental one that's a bad sign. At nay rate Like I said I'm more than likely of the on the unpopular side of this issue. At any rate I'll just agree to dis-agree this is bound to become a circular conversation.

It's called a 'straw man' argument. You first say what you think I am influenced by and then attack that influence and we are to marvel at your astuteness, with out realizing I never thought that way in the first place, you just said I did.

sorry, loudmouth, I don't have to have to subscribe to any philosophy and tout any "ism" or voodoo. I did learn to think for myself. I chose to live in a very environmentally conscious country and it is how our local town and county government works. We don't even allow styrofoam cups or plastic shopping bags here. Water, power, electric renewable energy is all very important to our rural area here.

I suppose it is different elsewhere.

If Green Peace can be discounted for being political, good, for who is not political?

Coal and oil are dirty, but controllable, and that means profitable. Where does energy come from? Recent discoveries show that the bottom of the oceans are covered in pools of Hydrate, liquid natural gas, a clean fuel, and an endless supply.

It seems to flow through rock, gathering other things, and form pools of oil and gas.

So why when we discover endless energy, the cleanest of fuels, is it being ignored? Politics, profits, and for all the talk and politics, there is always gas at the pump, and talk raises the price. Nothing is as political as the oil companies. They own a President.

They also own our national energy policy, they bought the rights to coal, and have a right to profit by it, even if it is a planet killing old technology, its money.

Well drilling, mining, atomic power, can be controlled, it is political. It can be bought.

The government funding a few thousand square miles of solor electric would bring the cost way down, within the range of all users. That would be an energy policy. It is clean, long lasting, and useful.

It is political, and the coal and oil folks think it would look funny, people getting free energy. It is just not right. They are the meter lobby, everything must have a meter.

We The People are the voice to be heard, and more are speaking out. Coal is best left where it is. Atomic power creates leftovers that last longer than humans have.

Killing people and selling their organs is profitable, but not allowed, slowy killing the planet should also not be allowed. Products should be priced at their actual total cost to life, which means coal, oil, atomic, would be very expensive energy, and photo electric, ocean hydrates, would be very cheap.

Politice is humans being humans, and corporate politics is telling them to shut up.