Congratulations, the IPCC and Al Gore!
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the 2007 Nobel Peace prize jointly to Al Gore and the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
In its citation-- whose original wording in English, I should note, was fairly sexist-- the NNC wrote:
- 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 [hu]mankind. Action is necessary now, before climate change moves beyond [humanity]’s control.
When I was writing my 2000 book on some notable Nobel peace Prize winners, I interviewed the NNC's Secretary, Geir Lundestad, about the choosing process, and indeed he confirmed to me that the Committee, which is all-Norwegian, tries to choose recipients with the idea of encouraging their further efforts with the projects for which they have been selected. This is the second Peace prize to be given for reasons related to the environment. The first was the one awarded to Kenya's Wangari Maathai in 2004. So the NNC really does seem to be underlining its concern for climate-change issues, and their relation to human security.
I'm not sure whether this award might strengthen the possibility that members of the US Democratic Party might want to draft Al Gore in as the party's presidential candidate? That could be an interesting development, though I'm not entirely sure how I would feel about it if it happened. Certainly, the award is a good recognition of the work he has done to bring the climate-change issue to the attention of the US public.
I do kind of wish, though, that the NNC had offered a portion of the prize to Oxfam, since it has done some pioneering work showing the degree to which the harms caused by global warming can be expected to fall onto the lowest-income countries-- as well as the degree to which the human-induced part of the warming has indeed been caused disproportionately by rich countries over the past 150 years. Al Gore really hasn't dealt much with those global-balance and global-equity aspects of the issue, as far as I know.
Anyway, if you want to learn more about the IPCC and its chairperson Rajendra Pachauri, you can do so through its website, here. This is Gore's official website.
“Certainly, the award is a good recognition of the work he has done to bring the climate-change issue to the attention of the US public”.
Since Nobel established his prize, a million dollar lump sum changed its monetary value dramatically as, perhaps, the meaning itself of only “a practical implementation” eligible for this award did.
Although amount of data present with, for instance, a known doco is impressive, adapting to natural processes is not synonymous to changing a way nature works.
However, is world really more safe and peaceful since Messrs Arafat and Rabin, or more late, H.E. Annan were awarded the same prize?
Unfortunately it's not just like the old Hot Chocolate song, "Everybody loves a winner", Al.“Gore No More” - The Palast Report
Come to think of it that old song was actually "Everyones a winner" which really doesn't fit the "Story of Al', and in the case of America would appear to be almost a treasonous proposition. But it's a thought-provoking clip from Greg anway. Watch it if you have Broadband.
I sincerely regret if my comment had initiated ones’ speculations of personal attitudes / attractions.
Let’s distinct views from devoted to these views.
As I viewed the video, I think Palaast was sceptical of a range of Gore's political positions over time, rather than being critical of climate change science on any basis, ad-personam or otherwise.
Your earlier post didn't seem to be encouraging any speculations of personal attitudes or attractions that I could see, Michael.