I normally would ignore a post like this but in this instance, I just couldn't.

I have to ask a question? If George Bush had won instead of Al Gore, would you still think the Nobel Prize is a joke? I mean, come on, just because you don't agree with the man, doesn't mean you have to denigrate the institution, the same institution that has awarded prizes to people such as Martin Luther King, Mother Teresa, the 14th Dalai Lama and Nelson Mandela.

And yes, just in case you ask, I happen to think Al Gore deserved this award because he brought a message to the world very few other leaders were willing to talk about. He got it in the press and in the faces of those who can actually do something about it.

Global warming, whether you believe it or not, is very real. Just ask the farmers being decimated by the worst droughts ever in Australia.

The issue is not Global Warming. The issue is man made global warming, and that is very much in doubt.

Absolutely! What has W done for world peace? It isn't his political leanings my friend. It is lack of merit. Sure, many people have rightly been awarded but after Arafat, Carter and Gore, I can't help but think it's a joke.

Oh, and very scientific of you to say drought in Australia=GW----FACT! Science doesn't work that way my. There are plenty of explainations to what is happening with global climate changes and none of them resoundingly conclude that human beings have caused global warming...and that's a fact jack.

Doc,



Did I say 'man made' global warming? I said I happened to believe Al Gore deserved the award for bringing this issue to the attention of the world's media. My reaction was to the view that the Nobel Peace Prize is a crock because it chose winners who some might not agree with or like.

Jill,



To start with, I'm not a scientist. But I am living with increasingly high prices for just about every sort of food product because of the decimating drought. I believe this is caused by global warming. Whether it is man made or not is still up for debate. Al Gore might be presenting something which is provocative to a lot of folk but at least he is trying to do something, which was totally my point.

True.(Well, perhaps not solid fact, but a damned plausible theory.)



Also true.


I'm only here for the science, to hell with politics.




~Zoo

dynamaso, would you agree that this is not the first drought ever seen on Australia? How about 1942-1945?



point taken and I'll leave it at that.

Yes he is. He's trying to make money and become more powerful. Nothing wrong with that, right?

Before you say it, yes, I am harsh on Al Gore and his lifestyle in relation to what he preaches. To me it is no different than the preacher who begs for the congregant's last penny, yet drives a Mercedes. If you're going to preach a lifestyle, you should LIVE it (and no, indulgences don't count).

While I would never have wanted him for president, I at least respect Ralph Nader for his consistency. Nader is a true believer. Nader has been preaching environmental responsibility since before Gore was sitting in Congress. And Nader LIVES the life he encourages others to live. Gore does not.

If working towards climate change merits a Nobel, Nader should have had TEN before Gore had ONE!

Bingo!

Excellent point to Gideon! And my dittos on AD.

So basically, what you're saying is, you shouldn't have to DO anything to win a prize, you just have to talk about what others have accomplished? Oh man, I am so going to win next year.

I don't have to stop wars, I just have to talk about how other people ended a war, and bring the threat of new wars to the attention of the public, never mind who is actually stopping wars.

AD,



I don't know if you were trying to be provocative or facetious or what, but I'll take this the way I read it and say yes, of course I know of the history of droughts in Australia.

But did you know this drought is said to be the worst in a thousand years. This drought is decimating our farm lands like never before. This drought is killing off the Murray-Darling river system in Eastern Australia, which supplies most of the water to our food bowl. The link Here is to one of many articles on this drought I found online.

Gid,

There are plenty of hypocrits in the world and most of them would probably be involved in politics. I'm am not denying Gore may have other motives for doing what he is doing, but the fact that the message got out and in the faces of folk who might not have otherwise taken notice is a good thing, as far as I'm concerned. If Ralph Nader had done 'An Inconvenient Truth' I would be saying the exact same thing about him. Simply, I'm not supporting the man but the message.

First, my point is that this isn't the first time we've had famine in the world nor droughts and it won't be the last. In the 80's here in the states they were screaming global cooling!

Second, just because you are experiencing drought in a regional area doesn't mean it's global. Texas for example has been flooding off and on since June of this year hitting record amounts of rain. The upper NW of the US are seeing higher than normal amounts of rain as well. Weather patterns shift but not due to GW. That's all. We don't understand the effects of Tsunami's and the ocean currents and their effects on the rest of weather patterns to even begin to promote such things as GW. That's all.

BTW, I'm not trying to be insensitive to your drought as that is a major bummer.

AD,

You don't believe the shifting weather patterns are cause by global warming whereas I do. While there is plenty of argument about whether this is man made or not (and by the way, whether it is or isn't is a moot point in my opinion) I think the issue should be about what we can do to help stall it, to help those who are suffering because of it and to make sure we do everything we can to protect this planet's delicate ecology. I certainly believe it should not be treated as a political issue, which is what is happening at the moment.

Tangent time again. I dont agree with 99% of what Nader stands for. He has been around for as long as I have walked or crawled on this earth doing what he is doing today. And making an impact. He came to fame with "Unsafe At Any Speed" that got the Corvair discontinued due to design flaws. He is tilting at windmills often, but he is HONEST in his zeal to go after the ills he perceives and notes.

That is why he would NEVER have made "An Inconvenient Truth". He does not make up issues to gain fame on, he sees enough real ones that need to be addressed and corrected.

Today some of us celebrate Gore's award, based on a lie as it is. IN 20 years, when his doomsday scenario has been shown to be nothing but a political power grab and unnecessary hype, he will be another Rachel Carson - blamed for the deaths of millions due to an agenda passed off as a scientific study.

And in that time, he will end up doing more harm than good to the Green Movement (forget GW for now). Because like the villagers in the "Little boy who cried wolf", he will wind up making more cynics than actually effecting any change.

Celebrate him now. But your children (generic usage here) will be cursing his name for the damage he is doing.

I understand Dynamaso, but what we are saying is that BECAUSE of the politically charged agenda that makes it harder to believe. You have Al Gore who is ranting that the earth has a fever yet (at that moment) he used more energy than the average person.

I am thankful that we do have environmental movements out there. I recently went to Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan where they do not have emission laws. I have a renewed appreciation for those inconvenient laws.

As a result I think we SHOULD be conscious about the earth and the environment we live in. We have water being contaminated because of herbicides and pesticides. There are issues like the one I just mentioned that are CLEARLY linked to man's doings. How come we don't hear about that?