The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 is to be shared, in two equal parts, between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Albert Arnold (Al) Gore Jr. 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.
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.
Through the scientific reports it has issued over the past two decades, the IPCC has created an ever-broader informed consensus about the connection between human activities and global warming. Thousands of scientists and officials from over one hundred countries have collaborated to achieve greater certainty as to the scale of the warming. Whereas in the 1980s global warming seemed to be merely an interesting hypothesis, the 1990s produced firmer evidence in its support. In the last few years, the connections have become even clearer and the consequences still more apparent.
Al Gore has for a long time been one of the world’s leading environmentalist politicians. He became aware at an early stage of the climatic challenges the world is facing. His strong commitment, reflected in political activity, lectures, films and books, has strengthened the struggle against climate change. He is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted.
By awarding the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 to the IPCC and Al Gore, the Norwegian Nobel Committee is seeking to contribute to a sharper focus on the processes and decisions that appear to be necessary to protect the world’s future climate, and thereby to reduce the threat to the security of mankind. Action is necessary now, before climate change moves beyond man’s control.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Jen beat me to it!
Gore and UN panel win Nobel prize
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7041082.stm
Does Gore have to share the $1.5 million with the IPCC, to add to his $100 million?
I assume it would be 50:50?
Will he run?
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1670838,00.html
Excellent news. Thoroughly deserved.
Action is necessary now, before climate change moves beyond man’s control.
–Nobel Committee, 12 October 2007
Gadzooks! Man can apparently control the climate, but only in a time frame that fits a political definition of NOW!
From John Berleau:
If Gore is indeed the recipient, this choice, more than any other Nobel Committee selection, marks the end of a 105-year era. In direct contradiction of Alfred Nobel’s last will and testament, the selection of Gore essentially means the Peace Prize can no longer be said to be an award for improving the condition of humankind. Looking at Gore’s writing, it’s far from clear that Gore even believes that humanity is his most important priority.
Not that there haven’t been controversial or dubious selections before. Jimmy Carter was selected by the committee in 2002 in what was partly a political swipe at the Bush administration’s foreign policy. Yasser Arafat was given the Peace Prize despite his ordering the killing of scores of innocent civilians.
But, at the very least, the stated aims of Carter and even Arafat were the improvement of human life. Gore, by contrast, does not even profess improving the human condition as his fundamental goal. Rather, his stated desire is to stop human activity that he sees as ruining what he calls the “ecosystem.” Awarding the prize to Gore in 2007 is the equivalent of honoring the Luddites who tried to stop the beneficial technologies of Alfred Nobels’s day.
A common theme of selection for the Nobel Peace Prize and the other Nobel awards has been the use of science and technology to overcome problems afflicting humans such as starvation and disease. This fulfills the vision of Swedish inventor and entrepreneur Nobel, who pioneered the product of dynamite. For the first time, an explosive device could be stored safely and detonate predictably on a large scale. Nobel’s products were used for war, as even the most primitive explosives had been for centuries. But dynamite also vastly improved the 19th and 20th century standard of living through its use in the construction of buildings, railroad tunnels, and sea passages such as the Panama Canal.
Read more here: http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/10/al_gore_and_the_mission_of_the.html
Gore has certainly improved his own lifestyle to the tune of over $100 million. Now those nice Nobel people have added more to it.
Maybe he could spend his fortune developing viable alternative energy sources – then he really would be worth a Nobel Prize.
Here was I thinking that Nobel was essentially “No-Bull”, that is, the organisation giving the prize had some credibility. They’ve completely lost the plot now. Poor Alfred would be turning in his grave, either that or thinking up a new use for dynamite.
Wonderful stuff – everyone should be thrilled.
The Southern Hemisphere has not warmed significantly in the last 28 years, and the temperature of the planet as a whole has tracked sideways for the last 9 years [ignoring a recent tendency to fall].
How long does this continue before the Committee realise they have blundered?
Doug
the Southern Hemisphere has more oceans, Doug. New modelling now incorporates the background natural cycles. It’s going to take often again soon, after the massive spike we got from the 98 El Nino.
This prize is simply “The Man of the Year Award for the Left.”
Media in Sweden re Al Gores and the IPPC’s joint Nobel Peace Prize.
Greenpeace celebrates and the Swedish left-wingers complain that a former American Vice President is rewarded with the Peace Prize.
Al Gore said: ” I’m going to donate my money from the Prize to the US NGO ” Alliance for Climate Protection”.
With the recent U.K. legal ruling on AIT, at least 1/2 of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize winners deserve an engraved “*” to spotlight the ignorance of the award.
How much you want to bet that Gore’s portion of the Prize, allocated to “Alliance for Climate Protection” gets invested in common stock of General Electric–like his other “carbon credits?”
To get this prize, Gore beat out a Polish woman who saved over 2,000 Jews from the Holocaust.
Apparently, Gore did something better than that. What or how, I could not even guess.
This prize is 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 and promotion of peace congresses.”
I propose Osama bed Linen for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Osama Bin Laden = Al Gore. Come on Davey, you can do better than that.
The abolition of armies and promotion of peace do not go hand-in-hand. You have peace when your enemies know better than to mess with you because you can hit back hard. I’d rank the Department of Homeland Security higher than Gore for a peace prize. At least they are saving lives by keeping tabs on terrorists.
Yes Woody we’re so much safer after showing our strong arm in Iraq.
Anyway it’s all great – the right wing blogs are going off the scale. Frothing and ranting. It will go on for months. So after this massive venomous anti-Gore campaign it’s got his cause even futher. ROFTL.
So maybe being dishonest norty little denialists doesn’t work. Try science and ignoring Al. And that’s not Energy & Environment shonko science.
And yes I think Gore has got some stuff wrong – but not intentionally. More indulgently.
C’mon Luke, it was a political stunt.
As our friend Vaclav Klaus said;
“The relationship between his activities and world peace is unclear and indistinct,” the statement said. “It rather seems that Gore’s doubting of basic cornerstones of the current civilization does not contribute to peace.”
Vaclav Klaus does not dig down far enough. A stable climate was one of the reasons for the rise of civilisation. Man has been around about 100,000 years, it’s only in the past 3,000 that he has managed to be able to get civilisation happening.
The other climate changing news story of the week might have been the New Scientist waxing evangelical on sceptics ‘ we need scepticism. We just wish they were better at it.’ I realise that is why I occasionally check to see if you have lifted your game, whatever it is?. No! just more and more desparate and disparate. I think Machiavelli said something analagous like ‘you are only as good as you have to be to defeat your enemy – so you better nurture them.’ So NS says, and listen up now aspirational sceptics, go easy on the misrepresention, cynical trashing of scientist work,sleight of hand, mendacity, traducing integrity of climate scientists etc etc. Sceptics, lift your game, reveal it, get better or get out and get replaced.
I have to agree, bazza. They can’t get their story straight.
One minute, the earth is warming, but so is Mars. It must be solar radiation.
No, it’s not warming, Watts and McIntyre have proven the measurements are wrong.
So why is Mars warming? Can’t be solar.
Or it’s a Joworaski, who can only get published in the loopy world of Lyndon Larouche.
Luke, the millions of people of Iraq are no longer subjugated by a murdering, evil dictator who also attacked other countries in the Mideast and tried to assassinate a U.S. President. Yeah, let’s just ignore people like that and pass U.N. resolutions to make us feel good. Freedom isn’t important I guess.
It amazes me how left-wingers like you can take any topic and turn it into an attack against the coalition, including your country, and our mission in Iraq, which is also about rebuilding the country. Think how the problems of fishery management in Australia would end if your country’s support forces left Iraq. (Luke, nodding enthusiastically in agreement.)
Bullshit – an evil dictator indeed but you guys have turned it into a festering cesspit of violence and killed hundreds of thousands in collateral damage. Well done warmongers.
Meanwhile in Afganistan Aussies are doing your dirty work for you.
And do we see you lot in Zimbabwe or Darfur. Nope ! About to invade Burma – not likely. Do you guys ever consider that most people don’t swallow your own bullshit even your own military.
“Mission” in Iraq – you mean “adventure”.
Tried to assassinate a US President. ROTFL and LMAO.
“ROTFL and LMAO.” That sounds painful, Luke.
“Tried to assassinate a US President.”
http://hnn.us/articles/1000.html
That was just after the warmongers had thrown Saddam out of Kuwait, after his army had accidentally wandered into that country, for some reason.
Just as believable as the WMD fiasco.
Is that true SJ, you don’t think Saddam tried to assassinate GHW Bush? Why do you think that (if you weren’t just parroting Luke).
ROTL to the absolute max. The CIA told us. DID THEY !! I just sprayed coffee all over my computer. Who would know – WMD remember. Middle East creds = 0.0 “Mission accomplished” – remember.
Who would know the truth with both the Middle East AND the US involved. Disinformation shovelled on top of disinformation. Maybe he did – maybe he didn’t. Probably with kit the US supplied him in the past too. George Senior should have kept going in the Kuwait instance and removed him. But George junior needed an “adventure” given he dodged his own service. How utterly disgusting.
More and more neocon wingnut madness. How about doing something deserving in Zim, Darfur or Burma. Nah – crickets chirping.
Meanwhile the neocon nasties are going berko at Gore and the Nobel. It’s absolutely wonderful to watch (not that any of this is really doing anything about AGW).
You guys should have paid off some more people. Tsk tsk for letting the paradigm down.
Better sack your think thanks guys – CEI gone. Marshall Institute gone ! Chuck out the Lavoisier dudes. New Board needed for Wapo, Wall St journal and E&E. Get yourselves some serious sceptics instead of the mediocrity and stupidity we have to put up with.
Might even be worth asking some RC staff to help them out.
Wow! Can’t argue with that “reasoning”. I’ll assume SJT is having what you’re having.
Just in case you’re interested, here’s Joint Resolution 114, authorising use of force against Saddam.
It reads in part;
“Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;”
There’s lots more.
http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/bliraqreshouse.htm
Here’s a little task you might like to consider. Compare and contrast the occupations of Iraq and Tibet. Include in your answer the stated aims of the invaders, methods used, enforcement of military codes of justice and media coverage.
Here’s a little link to help you.
What you want to compare one nasty situation with another. That’s useful. Who’s least worst?
Hey, you started it. At least I left Realclimate out of it.