Quote:The award was given to Al Gore, but also to the IPCC - this was an award for raising global awareness of climate change. That's not a partisan political issue, and it's not an award for personal fastidiousness in reducing carbon emissions (which, as I argued with Zenda earlier, wouldn't have helped much anyway - fuel not used by Gore would be sopped up elsewhere). Given the constant rancor that has been spewed at Gore from the Right ever since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, whatever he did, it seems to have worked.Yes, because of the IPCC and Al Gore the horrors of the eco-wars were averted. :wacko: Which is why ecology and peace are obviously linked.
-Jester
![[Image: EcoSticker.jpg]](http://home.mchsi.com/~russerickson/EcoSticker.jpg)
Peas in our time!
More to the point -- my objection (which I think we've discussed also) to Al Gore is that he is a snake oil salesman hoping to get rich by being party to the agencies that sell eco-indulgences to the politically correct masses who will need to pay for their pollution (like exhaling CO2). I would rather we focus on removing the SIN of pollution, rather than selling forgiveness. Because, just as it was with the Catholic Church's indulgences, the rich will be able to afford their SIN, and the poor will need to either be pious, or poor, or both. I think the Rancor was also released because of the inconvenient half truths, outright exaggerations, and misinterpretations presented as "science" -- like any good propaganda... it's mostly based on some truth... at least the truth he wanted you to know about.