Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/12/2007 10:37:06 AM · #3

For what?

Creating the Internet?
Creating a self glamorizing movie?
(Okay, the movie had something important to say, but those little snippets of Al Gore glamorizing himself between messages were bad.)

Wow. I guess anything can happen.

Message edited by author 2007-10-12 10:46:42.

idnic

Canon EOS-60D

10/12/2007 11:02:33 AM · #4

For the movie.

Nullix

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

10/12/2007 11:24:04 AM · #5

Originally posted by idnic:

For the movie.

Oh, silly me. And here I thought you got other awards for movies. A tony or an oscar? Now they're called nobels? Did he get a cool statue with the nobel?

Hey, Ansel Adams took some pretty good pictures. Can he get one?

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

10/12/2007 11:38:31 AM · #6

Let's not be so snarky.

"Former Vice President Al Gore was nominated for the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for his wide-reaching efforts to draw the worldâ��s attention to the dangers of global warming, a Norwegian lawmaker said Thursday.

â��A prerequisite for winning the Nobel Peace Prize is making a difference, and Al Gore has made a difference,â�� Conservative Member of Parliament Boerge Brende, a former minister of environment and then of trade, told The Associated Press."

And he SHARES this Nobel with "a UN panel on climate change."

Well-deserved, IMO.

R.

MelonMusketeer

Nikon D7000

Nikon MF 50mm f/1.4

10/12/2007 11:45:04 AM · #7

Al Gore's house in Tn Snopes.com.
He has plenty of room to display the trophy.

Nullix

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

10/12/2007 12:08:11 PM · #8

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Let's not be so snarky.

And he SHARES this Nobel with "a UN panel on climate change."

Okay, so he's like a spokesman for a panel. And it's more of a group win. I'll give that to him.

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

10/12/2007 12:10:17 PM · #9

Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:

Al Gore's house in Tn Snopes.com.
He has plenty of room to display the trophy.

I guess practice what you preach isn't a requirement for a nobel prize. Oh wait, he pays carbon credits, nevermind.

Creature

Nikon D70s

10/12/2007 01:51:03 PM · #10

Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:

Al Gore's house in Tn Snopes.com.
He has plenty of room to display the trophy.

LOL, it's as if the Nobel panel just conveniently overlooked Al Gore's own inconvenient truth. Their credibility just dropped a few notches in my book.

Louis

Nikon D800

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

10/12/2007 02:08:10 PM · #11

Originally posted by Creature:

Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:
Al Gore's house in Tn Snopes.com.
He has plenty of room to display the trophy.

LOL, it's as if the Nobel panel just conveniently overlooked Al Gore's own inconvenient truth. Their credibility just dropped a few notches in my book.

After all, when the Nobel panel is so cleverly minimized, who better to judge Al Gore's life work than you?

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

10/12/2007 02:10:52 PM · #12

He did try to save the world from ManBearPig

Creature

Nikon D70s

10/12/2007 02:50:47 PM · #13

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Creature:

Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:
Al Gore's house in Tn Snopes.com.
He has plenty of room to display the trophy.

LOL, it's as if the Nobel panel just conveniently overlooked Al Gore's own inconvenient truth. Their credibility just dropped a few notches in my book.

After all, when the Nobel panel is so cleverly minimized, who better to judge Al Gore's life work than you?

No one, perhaps. ;-)

FocusPoint

XIAOMI Redmi Note 8 Pro

10/12/2007 02:57:58 PM · #14

NVPhoto

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

10/12/2007 03:44:21 PM · #15

How does Al Gore's house discredit what he has been working on? He didn't win a Nobel for a movie, his movie was just a way to bring the message to the masses.

10/12/2007 03:50:15 PM · #16

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

All of this goes under the supposition that we have enough data to support the global warming theory as it is.

Which we don't.

We don't have a couple million years of verified data.

Besides, we don't have to worry about global warming with the way that the human animal is killing each other and the globe with methods that'll destroy it long before we deplete the atmosphere.

It'd be nice if we could learn to live together with each other and the planet before we worry about such an insignifigant aspect of how we're screaming towards extinction now.

And stating that someone is nit-picking Gore for that flagrant, profligate place in Tennessee is ludicrous. It's a disgrace, period for someone who's supposedly so worried about the planet.

Sorry, but it's not about us to judge him, but about him to lead by example.....so what does that little shack and Tennessee teach us?

Oh, wait!

I get it....same old, same old.....do as I say, not as I do.

He's a hypocrite full of hot air......hmm....a politician; I know *I'm* shocked.....NOT!!!!

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

10/12/2007 04:00:05 PM · #17

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

How does Al Gore's house discredit what he has been working on? He didn't win a Nobel for a movie, his movie was just a way to bring the message to the masses.

Because as so often is true of politicians, they say one thing and practice another.

If he's so freakin' concerned, then what the hell's he doing with a disgustingly wasteful place like that?

We're talking credibility here.

I really get a case of the ass with people like him telling me how to live and talking of the dangers of the world and then adding to the problem.

I'll bet I recycle more by rote in a year than he has in his whole freakin' life.....I *know* I did when I had my car repair shop.....I probably recycled 5 to 10 tons of steel every year, and many other materials in smaller quantities, and that was over and above the abandoned cars that I rejuvenated into viable vehicles that were then used in limited circumstances, thereby cutting the fuel usage per vehicle factor somewhat.

So I'm supposed to listen to Gore?

What he ought to do is to actually do something instead of just shooting his mouth off.

Does anyone really think that people that have a clue what is going on learned anything from this man?

I swore I wouldn't get embroiled in any more of these ridiculous threads, but this guy's supposed value to the world is so vastly overstated that it makes me sick.

I should probably insert the disclaimer that this is just one man's opinion, but I prefer to actually do something about trying to take care of the world rather than just point out what's wrong.

When he shuts down that house for good, hen I'll consider having one iota pof respect for him......and not one second before.

NVPhoto

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

10/12/2007 04:02:58 PM · #18

Whether you think there is enough data to support it or not, does that make the issue completely dissapear? Is there any negative effects for trying to reduce pollution? Can you really sit and deny that the human race is hurting the environment?

Even those who deny that global warming exists should not be opposed to trying to clean up our act a bit. Read the paper, there are articles all over about cities w/ dirty air effecting people's health. In all rational thought, how can the industry boom in a country as populated as China not be doing damage? Where does all that black smoke go from industry.

Saying that we will destroy ourselves before we destroy the atmosphere is stupid. You might as well say its not my problem because Ill already be dead. Seems irresponsible to me. There is no downside to being a bit more green.

People will adapt. If laws are passed to reduce emmisions, car manufacturers will just reduce emissions. SUV's and recreation vehicles won't disappear, the manufacturers will just make them cleaner. Most auto manufacturers could already be much more efficient, they have the ability and technology but its not required yet.

NVPhoto

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

10/12/2007 04:06:34 PM · #19

Jeb,
I agree he should practice what he preaches. Does that really mean his message isn't correct? I think its good he is raising awareness whether he lives by those words or not. It is irresponsible and kind of stupid to do what he is doing, but none the less his message is legit.

On the same lines, Bush lives in a very green house. Talk about a conflict.

Louis

Nikon D800

10/12/2007 04:13:16 PM · #20

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Sorry, but it's not about us to judge him...

Good job of doing just that.

Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0 STM Lens

10/12/2007 04:26:08 PM · #21

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

I did not at any time say that we aren't killing oursleves, or that it is a non issue, or that there are any negative effects. Reread what I stated, please before you put words in my mouth.

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

Even those who deny that global warming exists should not be opposed to trying to clean up our act a bit. Read the paper, there are articles all over about cities w/ dirty air effecting people's health. In all rational thought, how can the industry boom in a country as populated as China not be doing damage? Where does all that black smoke go from industry.

Lord knows the paper would never lie.....and the Chinese government would never slant any information, nor would our illustious fourth estate ever overstate a case to sell papers.

All you have to do is drive by any insurance company's corporate headquarters any time of night and you can see enrgy going up in smoke at a ferocious rate.

There has been a lot done to regualte industry in this country and many strides have been made.

We've brought rivers back from the brink of destruction, and cleaned up a lot of land.

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

Saying that we will destroy ourselves before we destroy the atmosphere is stupid.

No, if we keep up what we are doing now, it's true....and yeah, *doing* that would be stupid.....saying it is most decidedly not.

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

You might as well say its not my problem because Ill already be dead. Seems irresponsible to me. There is no downside to being a bit more green.

No, I might not, and will not say that because I do wan a world where my children's children can live.

But with jerks out there like Gore running around screaming,"The sky is falling!" without actually doing anything, how is that going to actually help?

There is no downside to being more green, that's why I live the way I do and have been ever since the first Earth Day.

Where were you then?

Don't preach to me if you don't know how I live, or what I want for my kids.

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

People will adapt. If laws are passed to reduce emmisions, car manufacturers will just reduce emissions. SUV's and recreation vehicles won't disappear, the manufacturers will just make them cleaner. Most auto manufacturers could already be much more efficient, they have the ability and technology but its not required yet.

Wrong path to take, my friend, the automobile industry is the worst offender of all, because they keep catering to us, the public to make these big pigs.

What the Hell happened to the cars that were getting smaller and lighter and having fule mileage creep up into the 40 mpg area?

They're being replaced by 6000 pound, $50,000 pound Lincoln and Cadillac SUVs!

Do you have any idea what the average SUV gets in the way of fuel mileage?

Most get less than 15MPG combined in the real world!

The CAFE stats haven't been that low since the 70s and I can't figure it out.....we're supposed to be getting better.

There's no excuse for that!

Also.....do some more homework.....the Hybrids?

They cost more energy to build, operate, and deal with the disposal of batteries than a regular car. The cradle-to-grave trail for those cars sucks!

Once again, the do-gooders insist on this good idea and then don't follow through......just like all too many of the doomsayers.

Look, I'm not saying that we're not making progress, but it's not enough, soon enough at the rate we're going.

And the average American's conspicuous consumption, in this throwaway society is the problem.

I just object to Gore's approach 'cause it'd be nice if he'd show us some progress, or give us some real solutions rather than just telling us that we're killing our planet.

Guess what, Al.....that ain't news. Some of us have been consciously trying to do something about that for almost four decades.....where ya been?

Message edited by author 2007-10-12 16:41:03.

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

10/12/2007 04:26:48 PM · #22

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

All of this goes under the supposition that we have enough data to support the global warming theory as it is.

Which we don't.

We don't have a couple million years of verified data.

So, just how much data does it take to convince you?

Does your head need to be engulfed in flames to know that fire is hot?

You must not believe that smoking causes cancer either. The argument you give to refute Global warming is the same argument that the tobacco industry used to assert that smoking was safe.

10/12/2007 04:29:34 PM · #23

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Sorry, but it's not about us to judge him...

Good job of doing just that.

Don't be a jerk, put the rest of the line in.

"Sorry, but it's not about us to judge him, but about him to lead by example"

Excerpting selectively is being intentionally antagonistic.

Or perhaps that's your intent rather than constructive debate.

This is why I should know better than to get involved with this kind of a discussion.

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

10/12/2007 04:31:22 PM · #24

Regardless of his mesaage, right or wrong, how do you give the nobel PEACE prize for fighting global warming? A science award I could understand, but not the peace prize???

From Dr. Alfred Bernhard Nobelâ��s will, which established the Nobel Prizes, from the section where he describes how the prize money is to be distributed, and specifically the peace prize:

â��one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.â��