Reply to Thread New Thread |
01-02-2007, 12:15 PM | #1 |
|
Thought this was interesting.
Gore earns Nobel nomination for global warming work OSLO, Norway (AP) -- Former Vice President Al Gore has been nominated for the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for his wide-reaching efforts to draw the world's attention to the dangers of global warming, a Norwegian lawmaker said Thursday. "A prerequisite for winning the Nobel Peace Prize is making a difference, and Al Gore has made a difference," Conservative Member of Parliament Boerge Brende, a former minister of environment and then of trade, told The Associated Press. Nice to see that someone thinks Gore's work has been worthwhile. |
|
01-02-2007, 01:28 PM | #2 |
|
Yea, really says a lot for the integrity of infra-working systems…
Everything is breaking down. The park census system changed there figures and apologized to the black community on there 183,000 -240,000 -350,000 million man count, exit polls after the al-gore/president Bush ballots for the first time in history began picking democrats at a 35% inaccuracy rate, a voting system used for generations suddenly doesn’t work because democrats keep loosing, marriage licensing for anybody wanting to marry anything, on and on with every freaking thing they touch. |
|
01-02-2007, 01:35 PM | #3 |
|
Yea, really says a lot for the integrity of infra-working systems… anyways, good for Gore whether he wins or not |
|
01-02-2007, 03:31 PM | #4 |
|
Gore Totally deserves it.
He's been trying to spread awareness of Global Warming for something like 20 years.... much longer than the public has even known the term. It's not like he's saving the world, but indeed, he could be one of the most influential figures in an eventual movement that can effectively solve the problem. |
|
01-02-2007, 03:56 PM | #8 |
|
What does Global Warming have to do with Peace?
The Nobel Peace Prize 1901-2000 The prize for peace was to be awarded 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 of peace congresses." The prize was to be awarded "by a committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storting." Thus, some lines of development can be distinguished in the almost 100 year history of the Nobel Peace Prize. First, although the Norwegian Nobel Committee never formally defined "peace," in practice it came to interpret the term ever more broadly. This approach could have its pitfalls, but avoided the danger of locking the committee into fixed categories and gave the committee flexibility to adapt to new concerns. In the early years, the emphasis was definitely on the organized peace movement and the codification of international law, but even in the very first year of the Peace Prize the first humanitarian, and five years later, the first statesman were selected. Later the balance shifted away from the organized peace movement and international jurists, although some of them continued to be selected and the category came to include church leaders and even a Holocaust interpreter. Humanitarians became more numerous, and this category came to include scientists who worked to alleviate hunger. Disarmers became more numerous too, and this category came to include those who supported limited arms control and not necessarily full disarmament. Different kinds of statesmen were awarded the Peace Prize, some for addressing global concerns, others for helping to solve regional crises, still others for the general principles they espoused. The human rights category was added to the list and gradually became perhaps the most numerous one. The prize has historically been about ending conflict. Now we're going to lump in "global warming activism" as a peaceful endeavor? Does this mean that we can create some new cliches: "Global warming advocates don't declare war on each other, YYYYEEEEEAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!" This is about as lame as the redefining of the "doomsday clock" to include global warming. |
|
01-02-2007, 04:07 PM | #9 |
|
What does Global Warming have to do with Peace? Different kinds of statesmen were awarded the Peace Prize, some for addressing global concerns, others for helping to solve regional crises, still others for the general principles they espoused. Global concerns? Global warming? I'm guessing here that perhaps the people who nominated Gore believe that global warming is a global concern. The quote also included this: ... although the Norwegian Nobel Committee never formally defined "peace," in practice it came to interpret the term ever more broadly. This approach could have its pitfalls, but avoided the danger of locking the committee into fixed categories and gave the committee flexibility to adapt to new concerns. |
|
01-02-2007, 04:22 PM | #11 |
|
OK, you've matched the word "Global". Now let's try working on the argument about how "warming" correlates with "peace". The quote also included (and I also included in my earlier response): I mean, one would think he'd be nominated for one of the... you know... science prizes. |
|
01-02-2007, 04:30 PM | #12 |
|
But their definition of "peace" has never strayed away from the issue of "non-violence". All the categorical subdivisions within the article deal with non-violence, none deal with "public relations":
Organized Peace Movements Statesmen Humanitarians Disarmerers Human Rights Not that it matters, we're just yapping 'cause we like to yap, and this is merely a nomination, not an award. However, if they're going to include non-peace oriented issues in the "Peace Prize" from now on, perhaps the thing ought to be renamed. |
|
01-02-2007, 04:36 PM | #13 |
|
Well, if Bono can be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, why is it a stretch for Al Gore?
Bono could arguably be brining the world together with his music, political activism, discussion with world leaders and humanitarian activities. Al Gore could arguably be uniting nations to work together on a common global initiative... nations that would not otherwise cooperate. Gore has given presentations all over the world. Although he is not a scientist, he is essentially the world embassador of the Global Warming cause. Perhaps that's why he's being given consideration for the Peace Prize. I think he deserves it. |
|
01-02-2007, 05:13 PM | #14 |
|
Gore Totally deserves it. He sucks big time, he is a Traitor like Clinton, and he is a total fucking idiot! His Home State HATES HIM, EXPLAIN THAT?? How does Global Warming Warnings effect World Peace?? If Gore belongs to this Forum, I am probably banned!! |
|
01-02-2007, 05:16 PM | #16 |
|
|
|
01-02-2007, 09:30 PM | #17 |
|
|
|
01-02-2007, 10:03 PM | #18 |
|
Al Gore has dedicated nearly 40 years of his life to the study of climate change. He's written books about it, and his movie is one of the best movies of 2006. Like "My Dinner With Andre", "An Inconvenient Truth" showed how a movie doesn't have to be told the same old way. He's passionate, enlightening, and funny, and if America had had 6 years with him instead of Bush, you wouldn't be stuck in the pointless nightmare that is the war in Iraq.
Any Republican VP with his record of reducing debt and helping to create the Kyoto Accord in '97 would be seen as a saint in the Republican Party, so give the man his due. He's actually been a straight up guy all these years, working for the people, not the powerful, not himself. He's a man of dignity, a statesman, and his argument about the climate crisis has shifted the debate in America significantly enough that global warming is now a non-debate unless you're a numbskull righty in America suffering from denial and working for big oil or gas. It's funny, even evangelicals support the environment, and many have broken with the administration since they've discovered that the White House isn't doing anything about it. |
|
01-02-2007, 10:08 PM | #19 |
|
Al Gore has dedicated nearly 40 years of his life to the study of climate change. He's written books about it, and his movie is one of the best movies of 2006. Like "My Dinner With Andre", "An Inconvenient Truth" showed how a movie doesn't have to be told the same old way. He's passionate, enlightening, and funny, and if America had had 6 years with him instead of Bush, you wouldn't be stuck in the pointless nightmare that is the war in Iraq. |
|
01-03-2007, 12:49 AM | #20 |
|
|
|
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|