Please explain something to me....

[aramis307]

What does a movie about global warming have to do with peace? Especially when said movie contains numerous inaccuracies.

Oh, and in case everyone had forgotten, Gore argued against signing Kyoto.

Comments

[psyop6]

Yeah, but even the Japanese are having their own problems following it...and Gore's arguments at the time amounted to, "We can do better than this".

[aramis307]

Most of the signatories have admitted they won't be able to follow it.

And given that it was a pretty bad treaty from the get go, yeah, we can do better than that.

Having said that, onc again, what does it have to do with peace?

[psyop6]

The Peace Prize has always been the one Nobel category whose criteira amount to, "It means whatever we say it means". What the hell, let's not forget that North Viet Nam's (Le Duc Tho, IIRC)negotiator shared in the prize in the '70s for the agreement that "ended" the Viet Nam war...

[aramis307]

And Yassir Arafat got one, too. And Jimmy Carter, but not as President (when he may have, arguably, deserved one)...

But at least those guys, bad choices they may have been, had something to do with armed international conflict. Global warming? I guess if he's the commander of GI JOE's eco-force, maybe, but otherwise it's just stupid.

Do oyu still work at the Air Force Academy?

[tongodeon]

The Prize is awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".

I suppose you could argue that global warming, desertification, and climate change have the potential to be serious factors influencing world conflict, the same way HIV has been in Haiti and sub-saharan Africa

[aramis307]

Glenn Beck has video of it.

And there is a difference between not knowing about something (as in Newton's, Darwin's, or Mendel's cases), and blatant falsehoods.

And the VP can't sign treaties anyway, so it was an empty symbol.

[tongodeon]

Glenn Beck has video of it.

I'm sure that Glenn Beck has a few seconds of out-of-context video in which Al Gore said something stupid. That doesn't change the fact that there are decades of public record in which Al Gore pushed climate change awareness and extensive documentation of his support for Kyoto.

And there is a difference between not knowing about something (as in Newton's, Darwin's, or Mendel's cases), and blatant falsehoods.

You're telling me that you can not only explain where Al Gore is producing "blatant falsehoods" but can prove that he knew at the time he said them that he knew what he was saying was wrong? I'm all ears.

And the VP can't sign treaties anyway, so it was an empty symbol.

And that changes things how? We're not arguing whether Al Gore made the United States a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, we're arguing whether "Gore argued against signing Kyoto." Making a big public (albeit empty) gesture of signing the treaty wasn't exactly an argument against it.

[aramis307]

Yes, that is exactly what I am telling you. Glenn Beck documents the falsehoods quite well in his special on climate change.

And you're the only one arguing anything. I'm simply answering a question you asked. I'm also maintaining my position that he was a foolish choice for the Nobel Peace Prize.