So, they gave Al Gore the Nobel peace prize for his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth”. Its their prize, so they are free to give it to whomever they choose, I just don’t understand why they gave it to him. What did he do to deserve it? His documentary, while informational (debatable) and entertaining (debatable) was nothing new or special. Many documentaries have been made on the same topic (and some more informational) but for some reason Al Gore was special enough for the Nobel.So far, the best global warming documentary I’ve seen is “The Great Global Warming Swindle“. You can see their site here, and a few video sites actually have the documentary streaming. Try here or here. What you will get is an alternative theory to global warming by people who stand to profit very little from scaring the general public.
But what do I know about global warming anyhow? I suppose I only know as much as I am told, which means I must carefully choose what I accept as truth. While I’m not sure if humans contribute to global warming or not, I now know better than to blindly put all my faith into one side. The truth is we can’t be sure, and serious scientific study needs to be placed into finding out some solid answers and eliminating some inconsistencies between the two theories. My opinion right now? We’re being herded (again) into thinking what we are needed to think. Too much science isn’t happening where it needs to be.
After watching TGGWS I can see that the accepted theory of Global Warming is questionable on a number of levels. As such, nobody deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for it. Not even Al Gore.
Update
Tamino sent me a link to an entry on his blog where he discusses some interesting fact shuffling in this documentary. While there are still some excellent points in the documentary, it would seem the core of their argument is questionable.
Anyhow, if Climate Change is an interest to you, check into the Open Mind blog. Lots of good information from what I’ve seen so far.
I still don’t think Al Gore deserved a Nobel. 
