burning like matchsticks in the face of the darkness|
[Most Recent Entries]
Friday, October 12th, 2007
|[I will probably limit myself to one unpopular post per day.]
At the gym this morning I saw that Al Gore won a Nobel Peace Prize. I get that they view global warming as a serious issue, but just because the Nobel Peace Prize is the most prestigious and warm-fuzzy-feeling-filled award they can hand out . . . I mean, seriously?
From the Pajamas Media roundup
: "I would have preferred to see the Prize go to some of the people putting their lives on the line to fight tyranny in Zimbabwe, Burma or the Middle East, but we knew this was coming."Fausta's Blog
Tripping over themselves to further asininity, the Committee bypassed true heroes of the worldwide struggle for freedom, such as the Burmese monks and the Ladies in White, by sayingEdit: PowerLineBlog
it wanted to bring the "increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states" posed by climate change into sharper focus.
As a rule, a scientist, author, or economist receives a Nobel Prize only after his work has been sifted and weighed and put to the test of time. Its importance has been established, often through years of peer review. As a result, the science, literature, and economics Nobels rarely end up looking foolish or naive./edit
By contrast, the Norwegian committee entrusted with awarding the peace prize comprises politicians, not scholars. Like politicians everywhere, the peace prize committee tends to be more interested in what the headlines will say today than in what historians will believe 20 -- or 100 -- years from now. And unlike their Swedish counterparts, the Norwegians often intend their choice to have a political impact.
Also: crit of his An Inconvenient Truth
documentary: This Ain't Hell blog
, Chicago Tribune