Inaccuracies in Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth

[GaryC 7]

Still say, Peace prize, #######?

Yeah, what does a movie good or bad have to do with the peace prize?

Many activists consider environmental destruction to be the worst kind of violence. Conversely, working for environmental protection is working for peace.

To borrow a quote from Dev,

"The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way:

The capital shall be invested by my executors in safe securities and shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work of an idealistic tendency; and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity among nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.

The prizes for physics and chemistry shall be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiological or medical works by the Caroline Institute in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm; and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storting. It is my express wish that in awarding the prizes no consideration whatever shall be given to the nationality of the candidates, so that the most worthy shall receive the prize, whether he be Scandinavian or not.

– Alfred Nobel

I don't see how a movie made from a power point presentation with dubious facts fits into the intent of Mr. Nobel.

Well you asked. Fact is - those prizes have always been political affairs, not least the ones for literature. However 'sometimes' the right people win them.

Destructive, I grant you, but violent? That is a bit of a stretch in my book. I guess it does depend on your definition of working toward world peace. Environmental protection while an extremely worthy cause, just isn't what I have in mind when I think of the Nobel Peace prize, but there you go. I still wouldn't have given it to Mr Gore either but then I don't trust politicians further than I can throw them

I didn't say I agree with it. Clearly however, these people did win the peace prize. So.....?

Did you know that Rush was up for the same award this time? Wow it would have been fun to watch if he got it!! (BTW I don't think he deserved it any more that AlGore did)

[Peikko 1,575]

So nothing really, I am just totally surprised by the choice. That said, it's not going to change anything whatever I think. I am not arguing with you either, just expressing my opinion.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Did you know that Rush was up for the same award this time? Wow it would have been fun to watch if he got it!! (BTW I don't think he deserved it any more that AlGore did)

Time to pop another Oxycontin

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So nothing really, I am just totally surprised by the choice. That said, it's not going to change anything whatever I think. I am not arguing with you either, just expressing my opinion.

I was meaning that for them to win the peace prize you would have to view environmental work in a specific context.

Gary is right that the choice is political. But then again it has always been - occasionally however the 'right' people win.

[Caladan 19]

Rush wasn't 'up' for it, to the extent that the 'nomination' system for the Nobel is completely, 100% bogus. Fun fact: once I finish my degree, *I* can nominate people for the Nobel.

[Ban Hammer 13,654]

Rush wasn't 'up' for it, to the extent that the 'nomination' system for the Nobel is completely, 100% bogus. Fun fact: once I finish my degree, *I* can nominate people for the Nobel.

nominate connie rice

[Fandango 1,440]

Look, here's MY .02.

Whether or not people liked the movie is not the point.

Whether or not the movie made people think is not the point.

The point is this....this is a movie...made with 'creative license' which blurs the line between fact and hyperbole....

made by a man who clearly does not 'walk the walk' as far as his own carbon footprint.

a man who lectures people how to live, yet does not heed his own advice....

This Prize used to mean something....when the likes of Martin Luther King rec'd this award, it did.

Now it's a mockery of its former self....all those great people who came before....and now look at who they're handing it to lately...because this is nothing more than a thought-provoking shocumentary that is filled with lies...made by a hypocrite who does nothing himself for the environment other than lecturing others.

Thomas Jefferson, one of the great authors of the Constitution with his great foresight on individual rights and liberties...was a slave owner. Does that fact make his contribution to our Constitution any less valid?

And what does TJ have to do with some guy making a sensationalistic doomsday mockumentary about everyone living a lifestyle that he doesn't lead himself?

In history, you'll find contradictions of character which in the context of things really have nothing to do with the validity of the message.

I coulda swore I responded to this already, but I don't see it so here goes:

I am not saying that AG's character should preclude him from a Nobel Prize, rather his works that he is being lauded for are specifically based on a house of cards and hypocrisy.

Btw, what's with the straws? You suckin the fun outta everyone's day again?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Look, here's MY .02.

Whether or not people liked the movie is not the point.

Whether or not the movie made people think is not the point.

The point is this....this is a movie...made with 'creative license' which blurs the line between fact and hyperbole....

made by a man who clearly does not 'walk the walk' as far as his own carbon footprint.

a man who lectures people how to live, yet does not heed his own advice....

This Prize used to mean something....when the likes of Martin Luther King rec'd this award, it did.

Now it's a mockery of its former self....all those great people who came before....and now look at who they're handing it to lately...because this is nothing more than a thought-provoking shocumentary that is filled with lies...made by a hypocrite who does nothing himself for the environment other than lecturing others.

Thomas Jefferson, one of the great authors of the Constitution with his great foresight on individual rights and liberties...was a slave owner. Does that fact make his contribution to our Constitution any less valid?

And what does TJ have to do with some guy making a sensationalistic doomsday mockumentary about everyone living a lifestyle that he doesn't lead himself?

In history, you'll find contradictions of character which in the context of things really have nothing to do with the validity of the message.

I coulda swore I responded to this already, but I don't see it so here goes:

I am not saying that AG's character should preclude him from a Nobel Prize, rather his works that he is being lauded for are specifically based on a house of cards and hypocrisy.

Btw, what's with the straws? You suckin the fun outta everyone's day again?

Does the fact that Jefferson owned slaves at the time that he helped write the Constitution make that document any LESS valid?

[almaty 19]

Rush wasn't 'up' for it, to the extent that the 'nomination' system for the Nobel is completely, 100% bogus. Fun fact: once I finish my degree, *I* can nominate people for the Nobel.

nominate connie rice

she is gay..and an azz kisser..

[DeadPoolX 9]

Look, here's MY .02.

Whether or not people liked the movie is not the point.

Whether or not the movie made people think is not the point.

The point is this....this is a movie...made with 'creative license' which blurs the line between fact and hyperbole....

made by a man who clearly does not 'walk the walk' as far as his own carbon footprint.

a man who lectures people how to live, yet does not heed his own advice....

This Prize used to mean something....when the likes of Martin Luther King rec'd this award, it did.

Now it's a mockery of its former self....all those great people who came before....and now look at who they're handing it to lately...because this is nothing more than a thought-provoking shocumentary that is filled with lies...made by a hypocrite who does nothing himself for the environment other than lecturing others.

Thomas Jefferson, one of the great authors of the Constitution with his great foresight on individual rights and liberties...was a slave owner. Does that fact make his contribution to our Constitution any less valid?

And what does TJ have to do with some guy making a sensationalistic doomsday mockumentary about everyone living a lifestyle that he doesn't lead himself?

In history, you'll find contradictions of character which in the context of things really have nothing to do with the validity of the message.

I coulda swore I responded to this already, but I don't see it so here goes:

I am not saying that AG's character should preclude him from a Nobel Prize, rather his works that he is being lauded for are specifically based on a house of cards and hypocrisy.

Btw, what's with the straws? You suckin the fun outta everyone's day again?

Does the fact that Jefferson owned slaves at the time that he helped write the Constitution make that document any LESS valid?

I don't think so. Besides, during Jefferson's time, owning slaves wasn't considered an "immoral act." It was simply "business as usual." You can't attempt to be objective and look back at history with modern-day norms and values. Things have changed far too much in even the last 50 years, let alone the last couple of hundred!

[Fandango 1,440]

Does the fact that Jefferson owned slaves at the time that he helped write the Constitution make that document any LESS valid?

I don't think so...for all the reasons DeadPool mentioned above...

Should the fact that the movie's not entirely accurate and AG's own carbon footprint is bigger than all of ours have any bearing on him being awarded the Nobel Prize for his work with the environment?

Yeah, it kinda should.

[GaryC 7]

Does the fact that Jefferson owned slaves at the time that he helped write the Constitution make that document any LESS valid?

I don't think so...for all the reasons DeadPool mentioned above...

Should the fact that the movie's not entirely accurate and Ag's own carbon footprint is bigger than all of ours have any bearing on him being awarded the Nobel Prize for his work with the environment?

Yeah, it kinda should.

Can you say hypocrite? I bet AlGore can't.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Does the fact that Jefferson owned slaves at the time that he helped write the Constitution make that document any LESS valid?

I don't think so...for all the reasons DeadPool mentioned above...

Should the fact that the movie's not entirely accurate and AG's own carbon footprint is bigger than all of ours have any bearing on him being awarded the Nobel Prize for his work with the environment?

Yeah, it kinda should.

How authentic of you.

[no name 1]

What about all the hours he's spent fund-raising?

The fact that he made the environment his issue for 8 years in the WH?

The millons raised to Alliance for Climate Protection, LIveEarth & the Climate Project?

The 30 years he's spent campaigning for the environment?

The fact he is cofounder and Chairman of Generation Investment Management, a firm that is focused on a new approach to Sustainable Investing? CurrentTV for viewer content?

The fact he is a member of the Board of Directors of Apple and a Sr Advisor to Google?

His best-selling book from 1992?

I get it, his home in TN needed work to be green. He's done a helluva a lot more for our country & the world. I hate that what should be a celebration for a Yank winning a very important prize is a mudslinging thing. And now the Nobel Prize means nothing. That is the most laughable of all. Sour grapes anyone?

Does the fact that Jefferson owned slaves at the time that he helped write the Constitution make that document any LESS valid?

I don't think so...for all the reasons DeadPool mentioned above...

Should the fact that the movie's not entirely accurate and AG's own carbon footprint is bigger than all of ours have any bearing on him being awarded the Nobel Prize for his work with the environment?

Yeah, it kinda should.

How authentic of you.

You only had to ask it twice to actually get an answer to it too!

[Ban Hammer 13,654]

Rush wasn't 'up' for it, to the extent that the 'nomination' system for the Nobel is completely, 100% bogus. Fun fact: once I finish my degree, *I* can nominate people for the Nobel.

nominate connie rice

she is gay..and an azz kisser..

don't you talk about connie like that, she's hawt