Al Gore's Controversial Nobel Peace Prize

This has been a year of triumph for former Vice President Al Gore. He had already won an Oscar and an Emmy for his film on global warming called an Inconvenient Truth. Al Gore added to his year of personal achievement on Friday, October 11, 2007 by winning the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize (along with the scientists of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on climate change). In its citation, the Nobel committee called Gore "the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted."

Gore's 2007 Nobel Peace Prize award has created controversy throughout the scientific and political world. A sample of the discussion can be seen in the following quotes by scientists, politicians, historians, and pundits:

Bill Clinton said of the Gore award: "He saw this coming before others in public life and never stopped pushing for action to save our planet, even in the face of public indifference and attacks from those determined to defend the indefensible."

The Nobel Prize“ is honoring the science and the publicity, and they’re necessarily different,” said Spencer R. Weart, a historian at the American Institute of Physics.

The Seattle Post Intelligencer published an editorial on October 15, 2007 which stated, "Al Gore richly deserves the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to him and the scientists of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. ... the former Vice President has gone from the depths of political defeat to receiving the world's most prestigious and meaningful award. We assume that after any electoral defeat, the losing candidate looks within himself or herself, engages in some self-pity and then either focuses on what could have been or what good can still be done. Gore re-energized not just himself, but also millions around the world."

However, the acclaim for Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize award is certainly not universal. One of the world's foremost meteorologists has called the theory (the link between humans and global warming) that helped Al Gore share the Nobel Peace Prize "ridiculous" and the product of "people who don't understand how the atmosphere works". Dr. William Gray said a natural cycle of ocean water temperatures - related to the amount of salt in ocean water - was responsible for the global warming that he acknowledges has taken place. However, he said, that same cycle meant a period of cooling would begin soon and last for several years. According to Dr. Gray, "We'll look back on all of this in 10 or 15 years and realize how foolish it was."

Also, consider an article entitled "An Inconvenient Peace Prize" ( Boston Globe 10/13/2007) in which Bjorn Lomborg outlines the case against Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth. " Gore told the world in his academy award winning movie to expect 20 foot sea level rises over this century. He ignores the findings of his Nobel-co-winners, who conclude that sea levels will rise between only half a foot to two feet over this century. Likewise Gore agonizes over the accelerated melting of ice in Greenland and what it means for the planet, but overlooks the IPCC's conclusion that, if sustained, the current rate of melting would add just three inches to the sea level rise by the end of the century. Gore also takes no notice of research showing that Greenland's temperatures were higher in 1941 than they are today".

Author of "A Skeptic's Guide To The Inconvenient Truth", Marlo Lewis, sees disaster in Al Gore's climate solutions. He contends that the adoption of the Gore-endorsed Kyoto Protocol would be costly and not impact the climate temperature in any significant way. Also, Gore's solution to "place an energy starved planet on an energy diet could well be a formula for war and poverty".

The opinions on global warming vary wildly from the left to the right of the political spectrum. There can be no doubt that the planet is getting warmer. The question of whether the warming is due to man-made pollution or part of the earth's natural process of warming and cooling cycles ultimately needs to be answered.

Thomas Friedman makes an interesting observation in his New York Times article " Who Will Succeed Al Gore" of Sunday, October 16, 2007: "They (conservatives) can't see what is staring us in the face, that in pushing American companies to become greener, we are pushing them to become more productive, more innovative, more efficient and more competitive. ...In pushing our companies to go green, we are spurring them to take the lead in the next great global industry-clean power."

Al Gore received the Nobel Peace Prize on October 15, 2007. We can certainly argue about whether his solutions to the global warming issue are right or wrong. We also could argue about whether he is the global warming "expert" that 24% of the American public identify him as (according to the latest Rasmussen public opinion poll.). However, Al Gore deserves high praise for his belief in the issue and his energy in moving the debate forward. The controversy of his Nobel Peace Prize award enhances the global climate change discussion in the nation.

Indeed, the importance of global climate change as a national political issue appears to be a debate that's just warming up.

http://www.eworldvu.com