I don't even know where to begin with this.
Firstly, it's called the Nobel Peace Prize. Now you might call me an idiot, but will someone please explain to me what global warming has to do with furthering world peace?
Furthermore, the Nobel Peace Prize is supposed to be awarded those who have dedicated their lives to a particular cause and worked at it for decades. Al Gore has only spent four years promoting the dangers of global warming. By the way, his "crusade" started right after his political career took a nosedive. That's a little too coincidental (or convenient), don't you think?
What gets me even more is that the man is promoting bad science. Now I'm not saying that global warming isn't happening, and I'm not saying it's not a problem. But what I am saying is that Gore is making outrageous claims with little, and often times zero, evidence to back them up. Ask any scientist, any real scientist, and they'll tell you that the global warming "crisis" isn't a tenth as bad as Gore claims. The man has used false data and scare tactics to get our government to institute environmental policies. If you want an example of what happens to policies that our based on bad information, allow me to kindly direct your attention to Iraq.
Even worse, Gore is deluded enough into believing, and getting us to believe, that the United States alone can solve this so-called crisis. What he either fails to realize, or else just doesn't care about, is that the USA isn't alone in this problem. Brazil is cutting down the rainforests that absorb carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. Latin and South America still produce cars that run on leaded gasoline. China has no environmental protection laws whatsoever. Even if the environmental crisis was as bad as Gore has made it out to be, the US acting alone wouldn't solve anything. Furthermore, mankind alone is not responsible for this climate change; Greenland is a frozen glacier now, but when the Norse colonized it 1000 years ago it was warm enough to farm on.
I don't like Gore. You've probably figured that out by now. It's not because of his political ideologies, although it's true that he's far-left Democrat and I'm a moderate Republican. What I cannot stand about the man is that he is a liar and a hypocrite. Plain and simple. He claims to have invented the Internet in 1991; the Internet is an evolution from various systems developed by the military since the 1960s and entered its current form in the early 1980s. He denounces the automotive industry and says that everyone should be "carbon neutral," walking, biking, and driving hybrids everywhere, while he himself uses far more energy than the average American is chauffeured around in an armored limousine and a private jet, both of which make him far more carbon negative that the majority of Americans. Leaders should lead by example, something which Al Gore has proven himself unwilling to do. "Do as I say, not as I do," may fly with some, but not with me. If Gore ever wants my respect, he should start actually listening to the speeches he's making about the environment and live life according the rules he sets for others. Until the, to paraphrase Charleton Heston, he can have my Mustang when he pries the steering wheel from my cold, dead fingers.
The fact that the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to a man such as Al Gore is sickening. This so-called award wasn't about peace, it was about politics. There were candidates who were far more deserving of this award, candidates who had worked for causes that would further actual peace. Instead, bad science, political rhetoric, and scare tactics came out ahead. Alfred Nobel must be rolling in his grave at this insult to his legacy. And I can't blame him; I used to think that the Nobel Peace Prize stood for something important. Looks like I was wrong.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Friday, October 12, 2007
I don't even know where to begin with this.
Posted by Raptor at 2:44 PM