WTF?
That’s right, boys and girls, our illustrious, former Vice-President (who invented ‘teh intarweebs’) is currently in the running for the Nobel Peace Prize for his work on global warming.
Keep in mind that he’s not even pretending to work for world peace like Jimmy Carter, nor is he feeding refugees in Africa. He’s not telling us about the plight of the Kurds in northern Iraq, or the Palestinians in Israel. He’s not working to depose the dictator of Venezuela. He hasn’t made an effort to broker peace between Pakistan and India, North and South Korea, or between Muslim rebels and the governments of the Phillipines and Malaysia.
He made a glorifed Power Point presentation based on junk science, loaded it with non-sequiturs, and he’s suddenly a nominee for one of the most prestigious prizes on the planet? Damn. I need to get some Hollywood friends, too.
This is a racket, folks, plain and simple. Gore is struggling to stay relevant by pushing environmental regulations and legislation that will hurt our country’s economy. Don’t think that this is being done out of the goodness of his heart. There are companies waiting desperately for the influx of capital from investors and banking firms that have shaky business plans based on poor science and pie-in-the-sky predictions. These so-called “green” companies are eager to develop energy-saving technologies or to reduce our “carbon footprint” by innovation. To do so, they are relying on elements within the Democratic party to hamstring our current energy infrastructure with ludicrous taxes, fines, and fees for normal operation.
American companies operate cleanly in America because it makes good business sense. The real green push should be to make companies operate cleanly in other countries that are eager for the injection of investment dollars and jobs. It doesn’t make economic sense for them to operate cleanly, but pushing for this reduces both the exploitation of people in poorer countries and provides a framework for responsible operation. I have no problem with this sort of lobbying, but to agree to a treaty (Kyoto) that severely hampers our ability to compete in a global marketplace is cutting our own throat.
So bottom line, as a trained scientist, I’m calling Al Gore wrong, wrong, wrong. His energy could be focused in a more positive manner, perhaps in the way that I outline above. His current pandering to celebrity is an exercise in remaining in the public eye to further his own barely credible agenda of saving the world.
I’m not convinced the world needs to be saved from my carbon footprint. It does need to be made safer for a free marketplace, and that can only be done with a moral commitment to help our fellow man with technology to raise their standard of living and with the exportation of our government and way of life.
UPDATE: GK sends along this article from the Brits. I love this quote in the article:
In what is a rare judicial ruling on what children can see in the class-room, Mr Justice Barton was at pains to point out that the “apocalyptic vision” presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change.
Sounds like one British judge is smarter than all of Hollywood, the Nobel Peace Prize committee, and roughly half of America. Go figure.
![Let’s Kill Hitler [HD]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51hESmStH-L._SL160_.jpg)
One important thing to note is that the “barely credible” description of algore is very close to “cretin” whoda thunkit?
Al Gore and his group of environmental frauds have WON.
I just lost a great deal of respect for the Nobel Prize.
Maybe I should apply for a Nobel Prize based upon my studies of various gaming habits and the effects on a spouse. If Al Gore can win one, I should be able to as well!
Regarding the fallacy that is Al Gore actually winning the peace prize, this is what I responded on another blog:
First and foremost, as not to be compared with the likes of Anne Coulter, I think we should all be tree-hugging, fuel efficient, kumbaya singing, humans.
However, this win — is insane.
I agree with Kevin. What does making a film and organizing a concert on global warming have anything to do with peace? As John alluded to in his introduction, if anything his film has inspired more carbon emissions from both sides of the scientific and political community. Inciting literary warfare by the left and right sides of everything seems to be a rather large contradiction to what the award stands for.
Mother Teresa…sure.
Al Gore..no.
——–
Frankly, I like John Ringo’s theory in “A Hymn Before Battle”. Who is to say that with all the natural disasters, the eruption of volcanoes (i.e. Krakatoa), that we haven’t been thrust into an ice age and the only thing that is saving our asses from becoming humanity Popsicles, is the fact that we are an industrialized society with the right amount of carbon emissions counterbalancing the natural progression of the planet.
If anything, our own environment can sometimes be our greatest enemy.
Here’s what the Nobel Prize folks think
“Indications of changes in the earth’s future climate must be treated with the utmost seriousness, and with the precautionary principle uppermost in our minds. 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.”
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/press.html
This man could reduce his carbon footprint by eating fewer hamburgers. I mean…seriously. Cow farts are huge contributors of methane to our atmosphere.
My thoughts:
So, he wins an Oscar for a hardly credible movie, and a $1.5 million dollar prize for an agenda that doesn’t really belong in the ‘Peace’ catagory. Just think of the poor saps that were in the running with more legitimate ‘Peace’ initiatives.
Now this bozo is gonna parlay these distinctions into some sort of Govt. position if the Demo’s win the next election. Great… It was bad enough in 2000 watching him try to scramble around the system (hanging chad, anyone?) in his loss to ‘W’, now I may have to seem him all the time.
Go Elephants! Please spare me from this particular Donkey…
A co-worker of mine who argues just to hear himself speak, contends that it’s not Al Gore who won the Noble Prize, but rather the foundation or study group that he founded and funds. He said that Al just accepted it as a figure head. Either way, I could care less. In my eyes, it’s just another sign that our country and our world in general places less value on true intelligence and more value in political issues that make people feel important and fuzzy inside.
Actually it was split between Gore and the IPCC.
“”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”"
Link = http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/