However, bonus points for donating ALL the money to a worthy cause

[holly_evolving]

Maybe it's just me...

I definitely think that Al Gore deserves recognition for the hard work he's done to promote awareness and understanding of global warning. He's gone to a lot of places and participated in a lot of research. He's spoken very eloquently on the topic. I suppose he's been the ambassador for global warming in the 21st century.

But the Nobel Peace Prize? How does being a harpy for a serious, dangerous issue that anyone with half a brain already knows about make him a world peace worker? He's not the first, the best, or the brightest, just the most prolific. And even that's arguable.

Eventually, the global climate threats will cause drastic depletions in the world's resources, which will likely cause serious conflicts worldwide. And if Gore had, oh, I don't know, accomplished something to prevent those conflicts, or undo some of the damage done, I could see the logic.

But help me out here, cause I don't get how being an (albeit justified) alarmist equates to a Peace Prize Laureate.

Comments

[demethos.livejournal.com]

I think it's because he's been campaigning for environmental awareness for almost 30 years. Seriosly, he dedicated his early career to it. From Wiki:

"Gore was one of the first politicians to grasp the seriousness of climate change and to call for a reduction in emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouses gases. He held the first congressional hearings on the subject in the late 1970s."[61] During his tenure in Congress, Gore co-sponsored hearings on toxic waste in 1978–79, and hearings on global warming in the 1980s.[62]"

[holly-evolving.livejournal.com]

I just don't think that environmental awareness=conflict resolution.