The Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Al Gore yesterday thrust the former
vice-president — and the Norwegian committee that honoured him — into the
heart of the 2008 US election battle.
Mr Gore, who shares the $1.5 million (£737,000) prize with the United Nations
climate change panel, was made a Nobel peace laureate for raising awareness
about global warming through books, lecture tours and the Oscar-winning film
An Inconvenient Truth.
The award citation described him as “probably the single individual who has
done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that
need to be adopted”.
The decision has inevitably been interpreted as a rebuke to President Bush,
who beat Mr Gore by the narrowest of margins to win the White House in 2000
and has since opposed binding international agreements for reducing carbon
emissions.
Ole Danbolt Mjøs, the prize committee chairman, insisted that Mr Gore’s award
was not aimed directly at the Bush Administration. He then added: “We would
encourage all countries, including the big countries . . . to think again
and to say what can they do to conquer global warming. The bigger the
powers, the better that they come in front of this.”
The last American to win the prize was former president Jimmy Carter in 2002,
when the committee chairman Gunnar Berge called it “a kick in the leg” to Mr
Bush for planning a war in Iraq.
Mr Gore yesterday appeared at a brief press conference quoting African
proverbs and promising to use his new status to hasten action and “elevate
global consciousness about the challenges we face”. In an earlier statement,
he said the climate crisis was a moral and spiritual challenge for humanity
— “not a political issue”.
That did not stop Democratic presidential candidates stampeding to
congratulate him and condemn Mr Bush’s stance on the issue. Within minutes
of the announcement in Oslo, 5.15am in Washington, John Edwards was saying
that Mr Gore’s leadership “stands in stunning contrast to the failure of the
current Administration”. He added that the award “shines a bright light on
the most inconvenient truth of all — the selection of George Bush as
President.”
As dawn broke, Barack Obama was praising Mr Gore’s courage to “challenge the
sceptics in Washington”, while the home page of Hillary Clinton’s website
featured a photo of Mr Gore in Socratic pose alongside a headline saying:
“CONGRATULTIONS!” There was a flurry of speculation that the former
vice-president could be given a post as a roving environmental ambassador if
the Clintons were restored to the White House.
Such adulation from fellow Democrats would swiftly turn sour if Mr Gore used
the peace award as a springboard into the 2008 presidential race himself.
This week supporters of a “draft Gore” movement took out a full-page
advertisement in The New York Times begging him to make another run for the
White House. But long-time advisers reiterated that a Gore candidacy was
extremely unlikely. “I don’t think he’s going to run,” said Carter Eskew.
“Technically, he hasn’t ruled it out. But I can tell you he’s making no
moves and no sounds to indicate to me that he’s going to run.”
At the White House, Mr Bush’s spokesman insisted, possibly through gritted
teeth, that the President shared Mr Gore’s joy — but had no plans to speak
to him. “Of course he’s happy for Vice-President Gore,” he said. “He’s happy
for the international panel on climate change scientists who also shared the
peace prize.”
Those US conservatives still refuse to accept scientific evidence that global
warming is man-made — or even a problem, were yesterday predictably furious,
with what they regard as another political statement by the Norwegian
committee.
Some highlighted this week’s ruling by a British High Court judge that the
film was prone to “alarmism” and contained scientific errors, while Rush
Limbaugh, the right-wing talk-show host, declared that the committee had
long since “rendered themselves pure, 100 per cent joke”.
One internet blog suggested that Mr Gore’s award was part of a pattern of
previous prize winners ranging from Yassir Arafat to Mr Carter — “a subset
of cosmopolitan frauds, fakers, murderers, thieves, and no-accounts going
back about 20 years”.
Critics say the remit of the peace prize, which now includes democracy, the
elimination of poverty, and improving the environment, has become too wide.
But Jan Egeland, a Norwegian former senior UN official for humanitarian
affairs, defended the decision of his countrymen yesterday who decided Mr
Gore’s work on climate change had “reduced a threat “to the security of
mankind”.
He said: “It is a question of war and peace. We’re already seeing the first
climate wars, in the Sahel belt of Africa.”
At the White House, Mr Bush’s spokesman insisted, possibly through gritted teeth, that the President shared Mr Gore’s joy .
i'm sorry when were journalists allowed to put words or expressions into people's mouths. gore winning the nobel peace prize lessens the value considerably. this articel also goes to show that as americans we're fed propaganda from everywhere. even places we're supposed to consider news.
i think also we need to remember the seventies when we thought that the world was cooling down. i agree we need to take better care of our planet. but i also think that al gore isn't the best choice... it should have gone entirely to the organization... its not like he needs the money, especially while he's using his private jet to go everywhere. i've heard from just as many scientists that this could be a natural cycle of the earth. remember there was once a time when everyone thought the world was flat. NOTHING is definate. don't jump on the band wagon
amanda, fairborn, oh
@ Stewart Watt: "What caused global warming in the past when there were no carbon emissions.." Erm, I think you might need to do a bit of reading on the subject. The process of heat capture and loss by the planet is an extremely complex system and cannot be pinned down to just the wobble of the Earth and the Sun. To do so is to undermine the excellent work that has been done in this area of science.
Even if global warming turned out to be false and after everything we did to prevent it all we ended up with was cleaner air to breathe, would that be such a bad thing? The effects of pollution on human health have been well documented.
Adam Malle, Castleton, UK
Well, it is interesting reading all of the punditry surrounding former VP Gore's receiving of the Nobel Peace Prize. The most curious comment comes from someone who is in China from ostensibly, the former Yugloslavia regarding the military action against Ethnic cleansing in that country.
Meanwhile back at the issue at hand.. if you would care to read the March issue of Science Magazine, which is on Polar Science, one of the most signifigant scientific journals just like Nature, you will see that there is grounds to be concerned about Global warming, and the data especially of increased melting of some of the Glaciers on Greenlands southern coast.
Like it or not, this is an issue that we have to deal with, and saying that this is a 'left wing' issue, or as the prior commentator stated that global warming solutions would lead to deaths in the third world, what do you think is happening NOW?
EastCoast, Maryland, USA
Noam Chavez, this is not about a liberal versus conservative divide, this is about the survival of the human race. There's no place in this for narrow political interests. However many errors Al Gore's movie may or many not contain, it's focussing attention where it's badly needed and where the arbiters of the affairs of humanity have so far abysmally failed to take up appropriate action.
Simon Cammeron, London, UK
The rate of climate change is unprecedented eh Adrian State, (Oxford)?
Considering that the climate changed in this country (Great Britain) from Arctic to temperate in 50-100 years at the end of the last ice age, you ain't seen nothing yet!
Those pesky neanderthals in their 4x4s and package holidays!
Tim Barnett, Nottingham, England
there's no dispute about global warming. The dispute is the cause of it. a high court judge ruled there were 9 factual innacuracies in gore's' movie. The main error in his theory and this is the absolute crucial premise of his argument is that carbon drives climate change, The fact is that carbon does NOT drive carbon change! It's sad that factual data such as that the judge ruled on has no place in scientific debate these days. It seems that whatever the politicans want. They get!
simon lomax, warrington, uk
Clearly the Nobel committee has revealed yet again its pro-liberal bias. To even things up I urge them to award George Bush and the Neocons the Nobel War prize.
Noam Chavez, Keller/Dallas, US/Texas
Nobody is disputing global warming,just how much of the change is down to carbon emissions,remember the earth used to be warmer than it is today which must have been caused by some natural event .The sun is what gives us our weather and seems to be totally overlooked/dismissed when it is mentioned as the main reason for global warming,that is my only reservation on the subject,what caused global warming in the past when there were no carbon emissions,..it has to be a combination of the sun and our 26,000year wobble of the earths axis.
stewart watt, thurso, scotland
I can't belive there are still people coming out of the woodwork to dispute the problem of global warming as the human race keeps exponentially growing as so do its industries and pollutants. Gore helped focus public attention on a very real problem that won't go away unless we start to deal with it and the earlier the better. Its possible he will have a bigger effect on global policies in the long run than Bush. The common sense of it all is indisputable if you are the kind of person who believes in cleaning up his camp site after trashing it out for a long weekend of partying. That is all we are asking!
Brian Stewart, los angeles, USA
Well I guess the prize money could go toward paying his electricity bill.
What a joke. We have just had Burmese monks risking their lives, UN peacekeepers being killed. But, this joker gets a prize for propaganda.
Why doesn't Al Gore and the rest of the world that believe his views go 'Green'. There are people who have and I admire their convicions. But, I dare say excuses will be made i.e. offsetting.
Do as I say and not as I do.
Sal, London, UK
Maybe Gore will now use the money from the "Peace" prize to pay his own huge electricity bill for all his wasteful air conditioning!
Thomas Goodey, Cuxton-upon-Medway, UK
I don’t think the people of Yugoslavia will ever forgive this warmongers Gore and Clinton.
Firstly they encouridged through the CIA the Albanians and the Serbs to have a go at each others troat
Only to bomb the Serbian civilian people with bombs shells made out of dirty Plutonium enrichet materials.
The aerea around Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria is since contaminated, read farming Magazins of this erea
like Donaumagazin for instance.As a descendent of old US Amarican and Europaen families,I say:
Shame on you US American Democrats!
e_widiner, shanghai, china peoples republik
Science and politics are a dangerous mix.
Perhaps some readers will recall the "scientific studies" used by political leaders in the past.
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
http://www.omatumr.com
Oliver K. Manuel, Rolla, USA/MO
"I believe that Mr Gore thoughrly deserved this prize."
I agree wholeheartedly!!! If you look at the pattern the Nobel selection committeee has going: Annan, Arafat, Carter... it only makes sense that Gore would be the next blathering idiot to fill in the pattern.
Mike, Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Maybe the Nobel Peace Prize should not have been awarded at all this year ... to remind us just how far from peace we are.
Kym, Melbourne, Australia
The US Senate never took a vote on the Kyoto Protocol -- it has never been sent to the Senate for ratification.
Susan, Winnetka, IL, USA
Excellent that this is brought to the fore yet again. All those people burying their head in the sand on this issue need a wake up call and that is what an 'inconvenient truth' did. Nothing other than sledgehammer tactics would have worked on citizens and im please Al Gore has got recognition for this.
It is not about climate change, it is about rate of climate change so we have two ways to go. Either reduce carbon or find another planet to inhabit.
davey b, bath,
George, just read Mark Lynas' book "Six Degrees". You won't be saying "Threat to our grandchildren - i doubt it" after reading that.
Bill Linton, London,
I wouldn't worry about Mr. Bush, he has a very thick skin !
Dave, Knysna,
I think it's really important for us to look at the problem of World Climate again since Al Gore won the prize. I still remember one has said in "Spiderman" : With great power comes great responsibility.
Nickenzyme, Chengdu, China
I love you right wing americans. you're so funny. of course you wouldn't be so funny if i had to live in the same country as you.
jan, Oxford, UK
The errors in the Gore film only served to underline the political and alarmist nature of the documentary. The errors in themselves had no bearing on the generally accepted scientific consensus that the current evidence on global warming is man-made in nature. The Judge in the UK case and the plaintiff accepted this in court. The conclusions and the broad message of AIT was not under question in the case.
Personally I felt AIT fell short as a documentary, info-tainment and as a political statement. Gore appeared to appeal to too wide an audience: dumbed down for non scientists, not scientifically sound enough for some scientists and too alarmist to be taken credible as a tool to influence political thoughts. Perhaps this is a case of where the messenger should be shot: certainly not to be given an award for a piece of poor journalism, lightweight political impact and a myopic social commentary.
The Nobel committee need to wake up and not be taken in by Gore's enthusiasm.
Bob, St Annes, UK
"Only the UK and its European allies would consider the silly award a rebuke to President Bush. Long ago the Peace Prize lost its luster in the US"
– John Hilbert, Los Angeles, USA
Indeed. Why have the Nobel Peace Prize when you can have an Academy Award?
Ben Marchant, Liverpool, UK
How can this be regarded as a 'peace' prize. His views are not based on proven scientific evidence and have been judged to be alarmist and politically biased. It seems that everone is jumping on the global warming band-wagon including those in Norway who should know better. This has ruined the reputation of the Noble Peace Prize. It must from now on be referred to simply as the Noble Prize and has no more crdibility than the 'X Factor'. Perhaps Simon Cowell, Louis Walsh, Sharon Osbourne and Dannii Minogue can join the Noble committee and we can have a weekly television show featuring anyone who wants audition for it.
Jon, London, UK
Anything positive that occurs these days can be considered a rebuke of Bush or Cheney. When someone is such a high-profile and dangerous fool as these two are, when someone has mired the world down in this much negativity, every rose that blooms is a rebuke.
Jim Houghton, Encino, USA
The Return of King .................... All hail, rising from the east.
The Dark Lord trembles in his dark tower surrounded by his Nazguls and Orcs.
Kam, London, UK
Democratus stated long ago that "Men believe what they want to believe," and they have that right in terms of art and other spheres where opinion plays a role. But scientific consensus is another thing, and civil responsible requires that we heed this and commit to doing the right thing.
fburns, skathlan, MI
last time i checked the nobel prize foundation was swedish
Del, manchester, UK
Gore is a political animal, his life style shows that he couldn't care less about the planet, he comes from a long line of snake oil salesmen. His father wanted to be president didnt make the cut. Then Gores mother decided to make him president another dead end. If he comes to believe that he could get the Democratic nod and beat out Hillary he'll jump at it in a New York minute. People he wants to be prez, the save the planet stuff is for the masses.
TZAZ, Gilbert, Arizona, USA
George Bush does not need Al Gore's Nobel Prize to put him a bad light. He has done that all by himself. He is a poor leader plain and simple. It will take the US at least 25 years to restore our reputation with the rest of the civilized world.
Kim Righetti, Upland, Calif. USA
Global warming is a witch hunt. It's proof that propaganda can reach even the most educated. The use of "grey area' statistics to twist science is deplorable. It reminds me of our history lesson, the time when people believed the world was flat. Science probably used a simple gravity lesson to convience the people that a flat planet is the only way it can be.
Gil, Daytona, Fla/USA
The important issue about Gore winning the prize is not that his was the most accurate or representative depiction of the problem. The important thing is that everyone's talking about it, and global warming finally has it's more than deserving spotlight.
Rams, Houston, TX
Any kind of light makes Bush look bad and for good reason. He has been terrible for the US and the world. His outmoded ranchero values have no place in the modern world.
Emma H., Ottawa, Can
Jorge, I couldn't have said it better.
P. Wetzel, Ontario., Canada
I believe that Mr Gore thoughrly deserved this prize. As some have said, this is not exactly a 'peace' type thing, but there is no 'global warming awarness' prize, so he and the UN climate change panel should have the houner of this prestigious prize.
Toby, Toronto, Canada
While Mr. Gore is an upstanding individual in the international community and has no doubt been doing good things since he has lost the 2000 presidential bid, we must remember his situation. He is not under the scrutiny or in the position of power that his old opponent now finds himself in. Mr. Gore, while he has done good things, should certainly not be hailed as being "better" than Mr. Bush since he is not in the same position. That said, I agree with virtually none of Mr. Bush's positions. Much less do I agree with the entire American political or governmental system. The partisanship of not only the US but the world is demonstrated so thoroughly through the speculation of this article, we should examine what we are doing to work together, as Republicans, Democrats, Greens, Labor, as world citizens to make not only our own countries, but our entire world better. Instead of calling one person or other better, lets be better as a community.
Chris, Shaker Heights, OH
Thank goodness for Al Gore
I have watched his film a number of times now and have taken the trouble to investigate the claims that were made in it. On almost every claim a huge proportion of the scientists who have spoken on this issue have supported them.
Of course there are scientists who have decried his views but in most cases it appears that they have a reason for their views e.g. working for multinational oil companies for example.
The scientists who support Gores views have little to gain and much to lose yet they support them nonetheless.
Doesn't that tell you something.
Global warming is very real and will certainly be a major factor in future wars.
The rate of climate change taking place right now is unprecedented in the earths history these sort of changes usually take thousands of years to happen.
My biggest fear is that the change is already too well established to reverse and that is I am afraid the fault of all those who have buried their heads in the sand over this.
Adrian State, Oxford, UK
I always love those who say they're overstating the problem. What's the problem if they are? So we think it's worse than it is, and fix it sooner. Is there something wrong with that?
Nick, Rockport, Texas
Mr. Gore has questionably been more effective since "losing" his presidential bid than Mr. Bush has seen "winning." It only demonstrates that leadership is not awarded but earned and that even those in the highes positions of power can only demonstrate their leadership if they have a clear vision based on facts and can persuade others of the worthiness of their goals. Mr. Gore, while I'm sure flattered by all of this attention and adulation, doesn't need it. Mr. Bush could earn all of these awards and still end up his presidency as perhaps the most ineffective, incompetent leader the country has had in several generations, as his former commander in Iraq, Gen. (ret.) Ricardo Sanchez, validated again just yesterday.
Joe, Chesterfield, MO
The Nobel Political Prize, in action.
What Al Gore has to do with "Peace," I have no idea. Other than that, he is a silly man who is wasting his life.
Scott, Durham, NC, USA
It is an absolute obscenity to have Al Gore receive such a prestigious award. However please remember the previous awarding of the Peace Prize to Jimmy Carter and Yasser Arafat. To have Ronald Reagan and Lady Thatcher overlooked as they were the most responsible for the fall of Soviet Union in the last century. This led to a brief period of world peace. This latest award of Peace Prize just means that the Nobel selection committee fancies socialist people whom have a very dubious claim to world peace at best. With their goal of having one world government as their primary aim.
John Galt, New York, U.S.A. New York
I feel as if I won the award. Mr. Gore is an intelligent person as well as a caring person. I would love for him to run for President . I voted for him before and I would vote for him again, and hopefully "they" would not rob him of his election again. Congatulations for a well deserved honour, one that the Bush administration will never receive.
Toni Amato, Bronx, New York
Toni, Bronx, New York
How can this be regarded as a Peace Prize. His views are not based on proven scientific evidence and have been judged to be alarmist and politically biased. It appears that everyone (save but a sane few) are jumping on the global warming band-wagon including those in Norway that should know better i.e. endorsing something as important as global warming without firm evidence. This award has just ruined the reputation of the 'Nobal Peace Prize'. It must in future be referred to simply as the Nobal Prize and has no more credability than the 'X Factor', perhaps Simon Cowell, Louis Walsh, Sharon Osbourne and Dannii Minogue can join the Noble committee and we can have a weekly TV show featuring anyone who whats to audition for it.
Jon, London, UK
To Mr. Hilbert, When will americans understand that the rest of the world simply do not care what americans think. The U. S has long been a luaghing stock to the rest of the world, isolated, arrogant and imperalistic. Every empire has it's day mr hilbert. (oh yes, I live in the U.S. and have done for over 35 years)
Rodney , los angeles ca., usa
It's a great shame Mr Gore doesn't walk his own talk and that he can't get the facts straight. Global warming is an issue that needs to be addressed, but this man is absolutely the wrong candidate for the peace prize.
Duncan, Bristol, UK
John in LA, please don't speak for the rest of us here in this God forsaken country. We have so little to celebrate theses days. I think it's wonderful and would love to see Gore run. Hillary? Not so much. I do love the quote from John Edwards, though.
John, go and turn Rush Limbaugh on and leave us to congratulate Mr. Gore on a job well done.
Teri, San Francisco, CA, US
Good for John Hilbert. President Reagan was the greatest President of the US since the Second World War.
I would however add that he should not have got the Nobel Peace Prize on his own but his equal ally in the fight for the freedom of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and without whom the fall of the Iron Curtain would not have been possible - Margaret Thatcher should have received it as well. Margaret Thatcher was the greatest British Prime Minister since the War (Winston Churchill excepted, but by then he was past his prime) Ronald Reagan could not have done what he did on his own.
Whatever the "peacenicks" thought it was this formidable duo who brought down the Iron Curtain with their joint resolve and determination and not them with their "appeasement", left-wing agenda.
Jane Haworth, Thames Ditton,
"It's an ill wind that blows no-one any good"
If this Nobel award gets him the democratic nomination rather than Mrs Clinton, then I (and probably a few others ) can forgive his pretentious fallacies about man-made global warming.
John Gregory Flinn, Béalencourt, France
Oh here we go again - the arm chair experts as usual. This award is thoroughly deserved and will hopefully get people like the ones on this page to listen to what Nasa, The American Academy of Sciences, The Uks Royal Society, Oxbridge, Harvard, Yale and Stephen Hawking are all saying - that we are running out of time. When will people wake up? Read a book on this subject from a scientist and not a right wing lobbyist for goodness sake.
Martin Fuller, London,
Its good to see Al Gore and others who work to help our climate from un-natural warming. But its sad to see from these comments that people still fight aganst thier own best intrests and use the issue for far right-wing Republican talking points. This is a global problem that effects us all regardless of political positions.
Allan Robertson, Glasgow, Scotland
Once again, the ignorance of many are outweighing the common sense of a few. As for the argument that this is just a "cycle" of our planet, I'd like to point out one simple issue. These cycles happen over many centuries and should happen gradually over that time. The fact that it is happening within a humans lifetime (human lifetime = lifetime of a fly compared to the Earth's) is enough to scare even the least intelligent of people.
But I guess its easier to deny an issue and live in ignorance, the only questions that I have for the nay-sayers....what if it is true? Does the risk of not acting outweigh the risk of acting? And for those who use the excuse "I'm not going to be alive...why do I care" should seriously take a look in the mirror and get over themselves.
Regardless of these arguments, Congratulations to Gore. The movie may have scientific error, but no more so than the presentations of those against Global Warming (major oil companies and current U.S. admin)
Jay, Toronto, Canada
I am rather shocked that Al Gore and the IPCC have won the Nobel Peace Prize. Their work is overwhelmingly important, but the Peace Prize is the wrong award for them. They should have had a special Nobel Prize for the Environment inaugurated for them. I would much rather have seen the Peace Prize awarded posthumously to Anna Politkovskaya for her work in exposing the horrors in Chechnya.
K John, London, UK
Erm Isnt a peace prize meant for peace type things?
Lets face it. There is not one political leader on this planet worthy of a peace prize.
So I know lets give it to some one who's racking on about global warming.
Len, argyll,
Oh do get a life. He has produced a book with questionable content and a film that now is agreed in court is rife with errors.
Global warming - yes, i buy it - mana made - maybe. Threat to our grandchildren - i doubt it.
Look at history and geological records. This is not crisis.
The whole thing can be managed through sensible energy pricing (to encourage better use), education (consumers made aware of the better things to do and buy), and environmental policies (litter, emissions, mining clean up etc).
But, I have to say, don't put this man on a pedestal when many people seriously attempt good actions every day and without recognition.
George, chelmsford, England
Good on you Al Gore - Bless you and your family - I have 2 Grandchildren that need people like you to see im into the future without fear.
May GOD bless and keep you . Regards Wolfgang - Australian Citizen
Wolfgang Steffens, Darwin, Northern Territory
Only the UK and its European allies would consider the silly award a rebuke to President Bush. Long ago the Peace Prize lost its luster in the US, especially when Carter, certainly a failure as president, wins, while President Reagan, the leader of the free world recognized as engineering the eventual fall of the Iron Curtain and thus insuring peace in Europe for generations, was never awarded the Prize he unquestionably deserved. To most in the US, the award means little, if anything, other than to further tarnish its image.
john hilbert, Los Angeles, USA
so a work of science fiction gets you the nobel peace prize ?
its a sick joke
col, harrogate, uk
I’ve always thought that The Nobel Pease Prize was for those who advanced Pease in the world! Not for making political statements!
Jim Roof
Miami/Cutler Bay, Florida
Jim Roof, Miami/Cutler Bay, Florida-U.S.A.
good to see a man who's so called truths are scientifically flawed wins the Nobel prize, And so another great institution is ruined by the liberal green mob.
James Alexander Johns, plymouth,
Mr Gore was cheated out of being President, well done on winning the Nobel Peace Prize, he is a man of peace, even thought GHG emissions have notting to do with climate change, its just another way for governments to increase our taxes and waiste our hard earned money on more expensive trips on private jets and attend fancy functions to help reduce GHS emissions.
mohsen, malaga, spain
If Live Earth had been a success, Gore would probably be running for President. Since he's shown that he appeals only to media and government elites by utterly failing to produce a show that drew significant audiences in, despite the biggest subsidies and sponsorship ever given, he knows he'd lose.
He'd look like he was winning for a long time. Many newspapers published stories repeating as fact Gore's claims of Live Earth reaching 2 billion (30% of the world) long after it was clear that those figures were well over an order of magnitude too large. They'd be just as willing to conjure up false support for him, like the British media did for the 1992 elections, but as the public grew more familiar with the bitter man who called for war against Iraq before he lost an election, then opposed it, who engages in conspiracy theories, and who represents one of the most dishonest figures in his movement, he'd never win.
James of England, London, UK
Gore is a noble man.
I can only hope he runs for president. America and the world need him.
Oscar, Kingston , USA Pa.
It's missing the point to say that the High Court said that there were inaccuracies in the film. If you watch the film, those inaccuracies make up the bulk of the film's non-autobiographical content. Better to say that it is *composed* of inaccuracies, despite, as the judge said, being an attempt to convey an accurate message, that global warming is genuine. One might think of the more extreme claims regarding Saddam for a useful analogy.
It's worth noting that the judgement only dealt with the environmental inaccuracies. Gore's claim, parroted by Stern, that you could not buy American cars in China because they did not meet Chinese emmission standards, was not dealth with, for instance. As it happens, China is the biggest growth market for each of the big three US manufacturers, particularly for SUVs. The most fuel inefficient of the stretch Hummers yet produced (2mpg) was shipped to China.
James of England, London, UK
Global warming and Depletion of fossil fuels- two dis-similar hypothesis and yet both predicting a time-line of no more than 50 years to see an end to our societies as we know it today. Kudos and power to Al Gore, for confronting a menace like the man from the wilderness, announcing a known fact that governments and oil companies refuse to acknowledge.
Sonny Fong, Coquitlam, British Columbia, Canada
The awarding of the prize to Al Gore, and the acceptance that the dabate over 'Global Warming' is settled, now gives the Nobel Peace Prize the credibility of the Eurovision Song Contest !
Shame on the Committee for not studuying the history of our planet and encouraging our politicians in this wild goose chase !
D Coope, Auckland, New Zealand
Sally Smith - I don't know what the Nobel Committe is - but I think it shows the Nobel Committee in a very good light indeed. Actually.
Debbie, Braunfels, Germany
Bush has covered himself with darkness for 7 years. This man needs no help.
G.Dent, London,
Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize shows the Nobel Committe in a bad light, actually.
Sally Smith, Columbus, Ohio, USA
I would love to see Mr. Gore run for President in 2008. He has very little regard for our PM Stephen Harper. Neither do I. Harper plans to not honour the Kyoto agreement. The effect that the continued development of the Alberta Tar Sands project on world emissions of GHG will be very significant.
Mr Gore -- If you really want to stop GHG's emissions, you should run for President in 2008.
Rob, Halifax, Nova Scotia
You do not need a Nobel prize to show Bush in a bad light, he does a great job himself.
Farrukh, Woking, UK
Jimmy Carter won this prize once.
Christopher Gillibrand, Brussels, Belgium
The best thing the U.S. federal government could do is tax fuel heavily, equal to UK and European levels.
peter robertson, Jedburgh,
This is complete nonsense. Kyoto was rejected 98-0 when clinton was President and Gore was vice president. Gore only found this religion of global warming after losing the 2000 election. He was a phony in 2000 when he lost the presidency and he continues to be a loser by promoting propaganda as science. The fact that his film has been discredited by many scientists seems unimportant to lunatics on the left. Only when hundreds of millions of third worlders are starving to death due to the economic impact of global warming "solutions" will the socialists, communists and assorted left wing freaks be contented. With the left, humans come last.
Jorge Mata, Coral Gables, Florida