And this year's Nobel Peace Prize goes to.... the man who invented the internet. This time for "[putting] climate change on the agenda". Well, congratulations Mr. Gore, and woooooo sensationalism!
Tell me if I am wrong and, even though thinking about the environment is important, and taking steps to preserve natural resources and wilderness areas is of utmost importance for us as a race, I still sense a hype. Not only does global warming not exist (we are 11:59:55pm on the geological timeframe, and the world was once covered in water) but are there not more worthy candidates? How about Gandhi, who never won because he reportedly was "neither a real politician nor a humanitarian relief worker".
The effect on American culture and society is this--a documentation of the international growth of sensationalist do-goodery. The massive uprising of the upperclass "eat vegan and organic and live well" lifestyle which promotes an all-around good mantra, yet feels like forced karma.
Well, I suppose we all could use better karma. But I wish we were more straightforward and cared about the world because we cared, not because it is fashionable. Then again, who cares WHY we give back, as long as we give back, right? Right... until the fashion trends turn again. If only sensationalism would stay to Hollywood.
6 comments:
Gandhi is not eligible for the 2007 prize (he died nearly 60 years ago).
While there are some dissenting scientists who argue about the causes and effects of global warming, none wholly dismiss the idea citing that "the world was once covered in water."
anyway...
Gore/Bloomberg '08! =)
I lost all respect for the Nobel Prize when it was given to Yassir Arafat.
Yawn.
Al Gore wants to save the polar bears? Maybe he should lay off the cookies lest he look like one himself.
good piece by Thomas Friedman of the NYT on this
Friedman = sell out.
He doesn't even discuss the contradictions within Gore's approach OR how some reasonable scientists take issue with how Herculean he makes the problem seem.
I'm not a climate skeptic or anything, but he has been challenged on this issue.
I was hoping Krugman would throw in his two cents.
"What is it about Mr. Gore that drives right-wingers insane?"
heh
I know this is a little belated, but this was in the NYT today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/us/politics/17climate.html?ref=politics
Seems as if even the conservative candidates can't evade/deny the importance of global warming. That, or they're just trying to appease voters. Either way, interesting to see how they approach the topic.
Post a Comment