Page 6 of 7

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:39 pm
by Art Vandelay
Tavish wrote:
JTWood wrote:That's like me giving your last post the Cy Young Award. It may be a great post deserving of recognition, but what on earth does it have to do with the Cy Young Award?

:-S

Climate change has been and will continue to be a cause for war. Darfur is probably one of the most recent conflicts that is due in large part to global warming but it isn't the first and almost certainly won't be the last especially if the warming trend continues and makes more of the Earth unable to sustain civilization.

And of course there is the search and use of alternative energy sources. I don't think it is too difficult to draw a corollary between the dependence on oil by a nation and war.


Yeah, the statement from the Nobel Committee regarding the decision to award Gore and the IPCC makes a pretty compelling case as to why they were worthy of the distinction.

Not as compelling, however, as taking a rifle butt to the face. It should have gone to those Burmese monks. The day that puts his life on the line to champion his cause is the day I'll acknowledge that he deserved this over them.

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:09 pm
by Tavish
Art Vandelay wrote:Yeah, the statement from the Nobel Committee regarding the decision to award Gore and the IPCC makes a pretty compelling case as to why they were worthy of the distinction.

Not as compelling, however, as taking a rifle butt to the face. It should have gone to those Burmese monks. The day that puts his life on the line to champion his cause is the day I'll acknowledge that he deserved this over them.

I won't argue that there aren't more compelling cases for the Nobel. But Gore winning isn't like the Nobel Peace Prize being won by figures like Henry Kissinger, FDR, or Arafat.

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:22 pm
by knapplc
Why couldn’t they give him the award for Science? Why Peace? It’s awfully political, if you ask me.

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:26 pm
by Tavish
knapplc wrote:Why couldn’t they give him the award for Science? Why Peace? It’s awfully political, if you ask me.

Which other Prize is more fitting? Physics, Chemisty, Medicine, Economics, or Literature. There isn't a general Science award and there isn't a Weatherman award.

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:29 pm
by knapplc
So you agree he doesn't qualify for any of them. ;-)

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:43 pm
by Tavish
knapplc wrote:So you agree he doesn't qualify for any of them. ;-)


Any of those I listed, yes. I don't think it is a big stretch for him to win the Peace prize.

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:50 pm
by knapplc
I think it's a crock. Climate Change = Peace? Not hardly.

I'll give Gore tons of credit for his work on the state of our environment. He's been about the only advocate for concern of any major political name in the US. Kudos and etc. for that.

But the Nobel Peace Prize for spreading concern about climate change? Whoever mentioned something about the Cy Young was right on.

Global Warming is going to affect the grass in the outfield, you know. ;-7

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:07 pm
by Tavish
knapplc wrote:I think it's a crock. Climate Change = Peace? Not hardly.


Tell that to the soldiers in Darfur.

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:39 am
by Omaha Red Sox
Tavish wrote:Tell that to the soldiers in Darfur.


It's pretty far fetched to tie a climate change to the cause of conflict like Darfur. Sure, it escalated the tensions that already existed, but we're really reaching if we're going to assume it would have been drastically different had Al Gore been doing what he's doing 50 years ago.

Re: Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize

PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 9:17 am
by Tavish
Omaha Red Sox wrote:
Tavish wrote:Tell that to the soldiers in Darfur.


It's pretty far fetched to tie a climate change to the cause of conflict like Darfur. Sure, it escalated the tensions that already existed, but we're really reaching if we're going to assume it would have been drastically different had Al Gore been doing what he's doing 50 years ago.

It's not far fetched at all. It is actually a widely accepted fact. It is not the sole cause for the conflict, but there is never a single cause for any extended conflict. Helping people adapt to the change in climate is probably the most important step to resolving the conflict.

http://seedmagazine.com/news/2006/08/a_hostile_climate.php
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19268452/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/15/AR2007061501857.html
Etc.