ideonexus.com

Congratulations to Al Gore and the entire Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for wining the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.” This makes Gore one of the most influential people on the planet, and draws much needed attention to the IPCC’s work, which is largely ignored by the public for being boring scientifically-dense reading.

Mega props to Gore for turning right around and giving the cool $750,000 to the Alliance for Climate Protection, which Gore chairs. Giga props to the IPCC for observing the scientific method all these years:

Each time the IPCC sits down to consider the solidity of hundreds of pieces of research its conclusions are subjected to both scientific and political scrutiny before they can be published.

Many scientists find this a frustrating process and several briefly walked out this year when political delegates objected to some of what they wanted to say.

But in many ways it is this process of scrutiny that has allowed the IPCC’s pronouncements to have such an impact. Every piece of evidence it presents publicly, every statement it makes has been assessed rigorously.

If it errs at all, it errs on the side of caution and by being able so convincingly to shrug off accusations of exaggeration that it has won credibility for itself and its findings.

McCain took the high road, congratulating Gore and issuing a challenge to him to support nuclear power. Bush took the meh road, acknowledging the prize, but not making any changes to his plan to tackle Global Warming by doing nothing… well, he might show up to some more free dinners.

And yes, I am reveling in the incoherent rage now spewing from the lunatic fringe, with their silliness about the sun causing Global Warming (without any scientific evidence whatsoever), a National Review blogger exaggerated Gore’s Inconvenient Truth exaggerations by reporting a British judge found 11 inaccuracies in the film (but there were only nine and the Judge considered the film was accurate overall), Telegraph readers evoked socialist conspiracies and ad hominem attacks, while a round up of blog posts reveals a world of pundits still trapped in the politics of 1999 (”Clinton’s only legacy will be a stained dress!” (Bite me NeoCon sissies)).

This award further reinforces the fact that truth perseveres. The wingnuts won’t be convinced, but their voices grow weaker with each passing year, muffled under a mountain of scientific evidence that now streams in on a daily basis. I appreciate the political fringe minority speaking out so loudly, it let’s the rest of us know who you are so we can keep a careful eye on you.

As I argued in my previous post, Al Gore doesn’t need this award with so many accomplishments all ready under his belt; however, the Environmental Movement does need it, and in awarding both Al Gore and the IPCC, the Nobel Peace Prize Committee is bringing attention to a cause that should unite the world, because we are one world first, and individual countries second. Lots of people can’t understand why people working tirelessly on an issue that effects everyone on planet Earth merit a “Peace Prize,” but these are the same people who think the solution is to “invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.”

Compare such negative and destructive ideas with chairperson of the IPCC, Dr. R.K. Pachauri’s hopeful and noble comments on receiving the award.