Jackson Free Press

...Al Gore, who is sharing it equally with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

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....

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...

As some of you may recall, Gore also won an Oscar this year for his documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth." Congratulations!

Previous Commentsshow

Once again, a Democrat wins for doing something good despite disapproval, disavowal and roadblocks from the dark side. I'm speaking of Al Gore who got cheated out of being president and resulted in us being at a war that may not ever end. Al warned us of man-made climate changes. There are those money-changers and others lucifer-like individuals who put personal monetary gain and power grabbing above the enviroment and the best interest of the people, like they do the words Moses brought back from the hill a long while ago. When you ignore divine advice, you get lost in the wilderness, and you start to lie, cheat, steal and kill to serve your own selfish and often ungodly purposes. Only one thing left for Gore to do, after an Oscar and Nobel Peace Prize, and that is to run for president so that the Hillary-haters (who are willing to give the warmongers another four years to spite Bill Clinton who isn't even running for president anymore) an option they can live with. I can't understand how a whoremonger is worse than someone ordering repeated killings. I have talked to all kinds of white women about Hillary, and I tell you I can't understand the great hatred of Hillary. I do understand the dislike of her to some degree for allegedly being part of a team they dislike, and for her penchant for jumping around on issues. When you know better, aren't you supposed to do better. Smile.

Ray Carter

Oct 12 2007

I forgot to add, that Obama is an option, too, but I know too much American history to count on a win there, at least up until this point. I'm always open to be proven wrong.

Ray Carter

Oct 12 2007

I also forgot to say that one woman hated Hillary so much that I was compelled to ask the proverbial question: Did you catch Hillary in bed with your husband or boyfriend, to which she said, "Hell Nall, I would have killed the ____ if I saw that."

Ray Carter

Oct 12 2007

I heard someone on the news talk about folks starting a "Draft Gore" campaign. Guess they think they can MAKE him run for president. My guess is that he is enjoying his life and doesn't want to fool with the White House right now.

LatashaWillis

Oct 12 2007

I wonder if Gore can raise the money necessary to compete with the 3 top Democrats right now. I like Obama the best but know he won't likely beat Hillary or Edwards and the hidden racism that would come to light if Obama won the nomination and ran against the Rudy or any of them still alarms me. The Democrats are still competing too nicely in my view. I'm for stooping low with the republicans. How else can you get on equal footing with them? You have to go where they are. I DON"T MEAN ALL OF THEM!

Ray Carter

Oct 12 2007

Ray, check this out: DraftGore.com These folks are serious. They have over 100,000 signatures on their petition.

LatashaWillis

Oct 12 2007

Once again, scientific illiteracy wins out. How is promoting a movie about global warming "Contribuiting to world peace?" About like Yasser Arafat's 30 years of massacring Israelites contributed, I imagine.

Ironghost

Oct 13 2007

I think global warming has been shown to be very much connected to world peace, in two ways. 1) Based on scenarios projected for the Peak Oil crisis, when supplies of oil run low we can predict economic uncertainty which hits more fragile nations harder, and may disrupt their government and economy. May effect ours, too. And 2) Similarly, projections of increased global warming show more extreme drought, and stronger hurricanes, which in turn can negatively impact the stability of nations, such as many of those in Africa, that are already on the brink of political instability and war.

Izzy

Oct 13 2007

I completely agree with Izzy. I'm just curious, Iron, why you say 'scientific illiteracy'. Are you a scientist who specializes in climate? If you're not, what's the basis for your reasoning? I'm not, but the science seems grounded to me and did to a lot of climate specialists, as listed in this Wikipedia entry on scientific opinion on climate change: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change GWB, by the way, mentioned climate change in a recent speech, thus giving it legitimacy for Republicans, I'd think, which, if I'm not mistaken, you are. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) The skepticism seems to be not over whether global warming exists but over whether it's caused by human actions or is a natural phenomenon. I happen to think the former is a far more logical explanation. I'm just curious - have you seen the film? I'm also trying to understand why you bring up Yassir Arafat's Nobel Peace Prize in this context. Because Yassir Arafat received the Nobel Peace Prize, that means Al Gore's winning it has no value? Henry Kissinger, chief architect of the Vietnam War, also won it. Now tell me you truly think Kissinger was a peacemaker. I have no idea how the Nobel committee deliberates or thinks, but I applaud Al Gore for saying it's time to wake up before global warming gets worse.

lucdix

Oct 13 2007

I'd love to see Hillary freak out if Gore entered. Gore would enter as a bigger rock star than Obama at this point despite being behind in raising money and would throw a monkey wrench in the campaign donation machine. The Clintons would then do everything they could to destroy him. Don't forget he's also had personality problems in the past. Even black leaders were upset with him that he wasn't connecting to the black community as well as Bill Clinton. He's probably learned from those mistakes, but I think people like the "idea" of President Al Gore more than the reality. As far as the Florida "steal", if he'd won his own home state of Tennessee he'd be president today and Florida wouldn't have mattered. I wondered why he would win a Peace Prize for work that is more environmental than political, and I fail to see the correlation with "peace". I suspect Gore won in part because he's a better spokesman for climate change and global warming crisis than most of the egghead scientists who might agree with him.

Jacobi

Oct 14 2007

There are a lot of questionable awards in there, Gore being the latest. As for getting into a long-winded rebuttal of the movie, I have neither the time nor the internet connection to research and debate it. I do know there are points in the movie where the "facts" on global warming are based on faulty reasoning and bad data. If you're going to have an argument that'll shape the future of the world, I'm going to insist we have all the facts, regardless of your voting affiliation.

Ironghost

Oct 14 2007

Well, this is another statement I don't understand: "I do know there are points in the movie where the "facts" on global warming are based on faulty reasoning and bad data." How do you 'know' that the facts on global warming are based on faulty reasoning and bad data if you're not a climate scientist with many years of research in the field? I also have the impression you haven't actually seen the documentary to know which statements might be false in your view. Is that correct? I'm certainly not saying that I know all the assertions in the documentary are right, only that they make a lot of sense to me and from my own observations (and those of friends in other places who travel extensively), there's plenty of anecdotal evidence which seems to back them up. It also simply makes sense that if millions and millions of vehicles burn fuel every day it will ultimately heat up the atmosphere. Cities are demonstrably warmer than the surrounding countryside everywhere because more fuel is being burned. If you're referring to my voting affiliation, I have none. I'm neither a Democrat, a Republican, a Libertarian, a Green or anything else, also neither 'conservative' or 'liberal'. I'm against illegal immigration and for universal health care. I will not vote for either Haley Barbour or John Eaves in this next election, can't remember when I've ever voted a 'straight ticket'. Our environment is neither a 'conservative' nor a 'liberal' issue. It's an issue which should concern us all.

lucdix

Oct 14 2007

Hi lucdix, You might want to check out this site... It shows where a lot of the negative comments about Gore are coming from, and why they are showing up.

Rico

Oct 14 2007

Thanks, Rico - I'll do that later this afternoon, am in a rush at the moment. I just looked at Saturday's Clarion Ledger which has a story on someone who disagrees with Gore. The headline is 'Meteorologist: Humans Don't Cause Warming' - and is about a lecture held by "Dr. William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts" who said 'humans are not responsible for the warming of the earth'. I saw the film last year in the theater but have just ordered the CD from Netflix to go through it once again. Gray at least admits that global warming exists but maintains that it's due to 'a natural cycle of water temperatures - related to the amount of salt in ocean water' - according to the CL via McClatchy.

lucdix

Oct 14 2007

I'm not, but the science seems grounded to me and did to a lot of climate specialists, as listed in this Wikipedia entry on scientific opinion on climate change: lucdix We used to think Pluto was a planet too...

pikersam

Oct 14 2007

As far as I'm concerned, Pluto still is a planet. Whatever you call it, it's still doing the same thing it used to do. A better example might be that people used to think the world is flat (and I suppose some people still do. I talked to an old man in a Greyhound bus one day who did. He also believed that the earth was only 6,000 years old). But let's say that global warming is a natural phenomenon. If it is, it's one strangely very closely allied to the increase in the number of internal combustion vehicles in use on this planet. Since sarcasm never translates well on the Internet, I'm not sure of your position, pikersam. Do you also believe that the message of 'An Incovenient Truth' is based on spurious science?

lucdix

Oct 14 2007

Y'all are so deep. I like how y'all brillant people made this a good discussion about Global Warming despite my best efforts to make it many other things too. What's up with these white women refusing to come out and discuss Hillary "Billary Clinton? I know the deal, they can't explain why they hate an innocent, valuable and highly qualified women trying to break through the glass ceiling that they always rightfully complain about. She also has the money and support to take on the all male establishment. My bet is she's not ________ enough for women down here to support her. Y'all add the word!

Ray Carter

Oct 14 2007

Why is it that a consortium of scientists in scores of countries including Japan, and most Western European countries have agreed both that human activities cause global warming and that global climate crisis is already measurable and likely a major destabilizing force. Did anyone catch the several high schools who stopped football practice in Mississippi earlier this fall due to the potential for heat exhaustion and even possible death of their players? Its amazing to me how "head in the sand" some Americans are, especially when so many other nations are trying to guide us to some common sense about the future of the planet.

Izzy

Oct 14 2007

Also, one of the statistics mentioned in the Inconvenient Truth film was this: when you look at the refereed scientific journals in the US, there's basically no "controversy" the only "controversy" comes from popular media attempts to "balance" the story and also the industry funded "think tanks" who are hired basically to dispute science but are not in and of themselves considered scientifically viable by the larger community of scientists.

Izzy

Oct 14 2007

TOP TEN REASONS WHITE WOMEN WON'T SUPPORT HILLARY CLINTON 1. They still know something about women men don't know. 2. They're afraid she might do a Naomi Campbell on the help. 3. She will spend too much time shopping. 4. She might get mad and refuse to talk to anyone - cabinet members, other leaders, Bill, et al. 5. She will say nothing is wrong when in actuality lots of things are wrong - from internalization a mental wreck. 6. She might spend too much time gossiping about ancillary and, extraneous, and collateral matters. 7. She's a secret alcoholic or mental patient. 8. They know a woman can't perform a big job like that. i.e. - running the military, puting republicans in their place, etc.. 9. Bill may cheat on her again and tempt her to push the button early. 10. Women don't like women - jealousy and envy.

Ray Carter

Oct 15 2007

I forgot to say these are things women told me. I'm not saying I accept any as valid.

Ray Carter

Oct 15 2007

Congratulations to Al Gore and his being the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. There are many who think that the dots cannot be connected between WORLD PEACE and GLOBAL WARMING. I hope it won't take our having to live with polar bears in our back yards to know that All's position is scientifically based. Ray Carter, you make an interesting argument about the Hilary for President deal. You have directed your questions and made your assessment based on the thoughts and feelings of White women. At lunch the other day, one of my African American co-workers said, "I can't stand Hilary: She makes me sick." When I asked what the woman had said, done, or implied, she was without an answer. She simply said, "I just don't like the Witch )with a (B). My assessment is that Bill Clinton represents for a lot of women (Black, White, Other) someone's father, lover, husband who committed either personally or vicariously, adultry or some other "abusive" act. The ANGER is displaced! If Hilary had divorced Bill and moved out of the White House, she would have become the Savior for what a lot of women wish that they had the strength to do. Her fame would have been short-lived and forgotten, however. If they were children who had to helplessly listen/observe abusive actions from a male figure, it is not uncommon to see/hear generalizations about males across the spectrum, i.e., you just can't trust a man....." I don't think that Gore will get in the race. This would be entirely too disruptive and I think that it will be an automatic ticket for failure to elect a Democrat as the next president. It doesn't matter how very badly Bush and some of his Republican "warmongers" have screwed the Country up. By the way, I hope that Obama isn't crazy enough to start a war with Hilary. This is what a lot of males are pushing. This would be a "Go To Hell Free Ticket."

justjess

Oct 15 2007

Hillary is the correct spelling. My Bad!

justjess

Oct 15 2007

Excellent commentary, Justjess. Your friends should thank you. Gotta head to the doctor. Might get my head checked too while I'm at it.

Ray Carter

Oct 15 2007