Al Gore may not have won the presidency, but he did win the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007. And Bush doesn’t plan on congratulating him. I’m not really surprised, considering I’ve already heard people complaining that Gore shouldn’t have won the prize at all. Why? Because global warming is teh fakes! LAWL
Sorry. Anyways, I’m not going to turn this into a prove/disprove global warming post. I don’t ever want to take sides in that debate. Not that I’m saying being environmentally-friendly is a bad thing. It’s just that I can understand all the sides. Okay, not the “global warming isn’t happening because God wouldn’t want us to die!” side (ignorance is bliss when death and destruction isn’t imminent, or even semi-imminent), but I can see how people might think it’s completely natural, completely human-caused, or a mix. I don’t really care. It’s happening and that’s all that really matters. Bickering about who caused it is pretty pointless. …All right, maybe I have taken a side. But I don’t want to get into specifics.
Anyways, so why did Gore get a peace prize? For making everyone more aware of global warming and the problem it poses (most Nobel Peace Prize winners do stuff like that). Environmental change is happening, whether you want it to or not. But there are many ways to lessen our negative impact on the world around us. There’s nothing wrong with letting people know about that.
I really wish he’d run for president again. I think he’d have a really good chance now that people are starting to care more about the environment and because anyone would do better than Bush. Okay, almost anyone. There are a few candidates I trust less than Bush…
Sphere: Related Content