October 11th, 2007
10:30 AM ET
11 years ago

Gore to learn whether he'll win Nobel Peace Prize

If Gore wins a Nobel Peace prize, presidential talk is certain to heat up again.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Will Al Gore add a Nobel Peace Prize to his Oscar and Emmy honors?

"An Inconvenient Truth," a documentary featuring the former vice president captured two Academy Awards in February. The film focuses on Gore and his worldwide travels to educate the public about the severity of global warming. (Related: Draft Gore group steps up efforts)

Last month Gore picked up an Emmy - the highest award in television - for "Current TV," which he co-created. The show describes itself as a global television network that gives its viewers the opportunity to create and influence its programming.

Full story

- CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser


Click here to see CNN's new political portal: CNNPolitics.com

Filed under: Al Gore
soundoff (52 Responses)
  1. Chris, FL

    Gore has George Bushes nose. Man I wish I wouldn't of watched that video that talked about noses.

    October 11, 2007 11:23 am at 11:23 am |
  2. Chris, Middletown, CT

    If he does – it will invalidate the Nobel prize. Generally in science you have the theory and open it up to alternate theories. With Al Gore – you have the CO2 is causing global warming – even though cause and effect are in reverse (warming happened – then CO2 increased.....generally you don't bleed...then you get shot....)

    October 11, 2007 11:30 am at 11:30 am |
  3. TWPeck, Saginaw, MI

    It would be An Inconvenient Truth considering how his body of work has been so one-sided and hypocritical.

    even an English court found his movie full of errors and partisan

    October 11, 2007 11:33 am at 11:33 am |
  4. George, Champaign, IL

    I hope he doesn't; what exactly is his accomplishment is bringing "peace" to human civilization?

    On the other note, though, the Peace prize has been awarded to thugs like Kissinger and Arafat, anyways. It doesn't really have too much value IMO.

    October 11, 2007 11:39 am at 11:39 am |
  5. Edward Mares , Rio Rancho New mexico

    In the film many of Gore's so called facts have been proven to be fraudulent or made up. Gore's nomination for this award should have been pulled long ago. Just ask the polar bears.

    October 11, 2007 12:19 pm at 12:19 pm |
  6. RightyTighty

    They're giving away peace prices for scare mongering again? Or is this board make up from those same agenda-driven environmental alarmists of 1973??

    Then the "consensus among the scientists" was that there is global cooling. If you review Newsweek’s first Earth Day edition, please do, you will see people holding up signs that read, "The next Ice Age is coming."

    Like those people, Al has done nothing but prompt his own self glory. Its clearly seen in his arrogant stance on the facts. Like Bill's finger wagging, Al's incompetence easily shines through the smoke screen. And like Bill's behavior, its not something that should be rewarded..

    October 11, 2007 12:23 pm at 12:23 pm |

    A NOBLE MAN. I believe Gore is effective in what he is doing now. I would rather that he continue his clarion calls to a world in environmental distress. This is indeed a noble cause.

    October 11, 2007 12:25 pm at 12:25 pm |
  8. John, Kansas City, MO

    Gore may have Bush's nose, but the resemblance stops there. Gore has a brain...and a conscience.

    October 11, 2007 12:46 pm at 12:46 pm |
  9. Burn wood stove Clearbrook VA

    You mean Nobel Nut Prize. I see he is back to shaving, must have donated the beard hair to "Build a Bird Nest Family"

    October 11, 2007 01:12 pm at 1:12 pm |
  10. Ben

    He will win the Nobel Peace Prize and endorse Senator Barack Obama for President of the United States.

    Good news all around

    October 11, 2007 01:23 pm at 1:23 pm |
  11. TideDruid

    Good grief, I am sick of watching people bow down to Al Gore. How many CNN employees must disagree with him before he goes away to his high energy household?

    October 11, 2007 01:45 pm at 1:45 pm |
  12. Dan (Columbia, MD)

    Junk science = Nobel Peace Prize?

    There goes the credibility for that award.

    October 11, 2007 01:45 pm at 1:45 pm |
  13. TR in Wallingford, CT

    Who are these people who don't believe in global warming who are posting these negative comments?

    Are these the same GOPers who don't believe in evolution?

    Give credit where credit's due. Al Gore has brought tremendous attention to this important issue.

    October 11, 2007 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  14. Randy S. Lawton, OK

    the credibility for taht award, went out the window when Big-Mouth Jimmy Carter won it.

    he needs to go back to his peanut farm and shut the hell up.

    October 11, 2007 02:06 pm at 2:06 pm |
  15. Barabas, Hot City, TX

    If this happens I will no longer have respect for the Nobel Peace Prize. Gore gets all the attention on this because he is a household name....meanwhile the people who really thought of and created the documentary and TV show get no credit because no one knows their names. If he was a stand-up guy he would give credit where credit is due.

    Not to mention that global warming is based on shady science at best. It seems every day there is a conflicting report on what does or doesn't cause global warming.

    Meanwhile, Gore sits in his 100,000 square foot energy-sucking mansion, flies to events in a fuel-gulping jet, and craps in a huge 1,000 gallon-per-flush toilet – OK, I made up that last one. He has no real concern for the environment.

    October 11, 2007 02:15 pm at 2:15 pm |
  16. Just me

    How does making a film about the environment qualify anyone for a Nobel Peace Prize? I don't see the connection, I mean, aren't the people selected usually those who have either helped end conflicts, or promoted peace...how does a film on global warming apply to this category?

    October 11, 2007 02:25 pm at 2:25 pm |
  17. Bob, San Francisco, CA

    "junk science" must be the new buzz word for the flat-earth society. The same folks who believe the world is only 6,000 years old and we fought in Vietnam and Iraq "for our freedom and for democracy".

    Why jump all over Al Gore on this issue? Can't people at least be enlightened enough to give credit where credit is due? Can people think beyond the rhetoric that's spoon-fed to them by right wing spin doctors?

    October 11, 2007 02:43 pm at 2:43 pm |
  18. Olaf, Tucson, AZ

    If he does, that will mean the Nobel Peace Prize has about as much merit as winning a Gold medal in the Olympics....that really doesn't mean anything anymore either...or breaking a homerun record in baseball.....just yesterday's news...

    October 11, 2007 03:15 pm at 3:15 pm |
  19. Jennifer, Seattle, WA

    Um....generally the Nobel Peace Prize is not given because science is involved....just efforts in peace

    October 11, 2007 03:18 pm at 3:18 pm |
  20. Aaron, Lynnwood, WA

    This man is a fraud, and I'm sure he's planning on running for president no matter what he's been telling us.

    October 11, 2007 03:18 pm at 3:18 pm |
  21. JB, Oaktown

    "junk science", "flip-flop", "fuzzy math" How do these comebacks work for the right?

    October 11, 2007 03:20 pm at 3:20 pm |
  22. Tim , Seattle

    Ah, Can you feel the jealousy?

    I see a democrat that is putting meaning to his life after politics. He won the popular vote for the presidency and he is even more widely revered now because of his concern for global issues and his enlightenment of an entire generation.
    I can only assume that conservatives are jealous of the fact that he has more influence and is listened to more on our planet than our existing president. Too bad you are threatened by someone who has a brain.
    You can dis-believe all you want in what he has to say, but lets face it...the man is an excellent writer and thinker...and better still a good listener. I guess the world sees him for what he is. And now he is being honored for it.
    I suppose thats a very inconvenient truth to those that just want to disrespect him. Too bad, because you are in a very slim minority.

    Lets see....Bill Clinton and George Bush Sr on Africa, Carter and habitat for humanity and Sudan, Gore on the environment.
    Go guys!

    October 11, 2007 03:31 pm at 3:31 pm |
  23. Steve H., Tempe, Arizona

    I am not here to comment directly about Al Gore and/or the Nobel Peace Prize.

    My comments have to do with media attention on environmental issues. In the late 60s, early 70s, there were several hot button issues that were as much, if not more, in the public realm as global warming. The book "The Population Bomb", films like "Soylent Green" (which mentions the Greenhouse Effect)all painted a very bleak future for the world (i.e. the next 30-40 years).

    Well, those 30 years have passed and very little of those dire scenarios have come to pass.

    As a child of the 70s, I find it harder and harder to accept the dire predictions of the global warming crowd.

    Now, I AM NOT DENYING that something may be amiss with the weather, and WE may very well be a part of it. My question is: How can we know what is an immediate danger versus what is media hype. The media reports the findings, but what are, if any, the agendas of those purporting these views?

    Is it up to us as citizens to cut through the media angles and the possible bias? Anyone else want to comment on this?

    I guess I am just jaded. Have a great day, everyone!!!

    October 11, 2007 03:41 pm at 3:41 pm |
  24. Nick, CA

    I don't think Al Gore should get the Nobel Peace Prize for this. Simple as that. And please, before you go posting anything about global warming, please do some of your own research instead of reading one bias article. This narrow-minded perspective is bound to collide with someone else's narrow-minded perspective; History is proof of that.

    October 11, 2007 03:59 pm at 3:59 pm |
  25. Ryan, New York, NY

    I think there are two reasons that the Red Staters don't care about global warming:
    1) They live in the middle of the country and are longing for a day when the oceans swallow Manhattan, LA, San Francisco and Southern Florida.

    2) The Apocalypse is nigh.

    Even if CO2 emissions aren't the cause, they're definitely not helping to curb global warming. That said, what's the problem with trying to find more efficient alternatives? They at least require less fuel, which is a step in the right direction for other reasons, unless you're an oil company that will make less money from reduced sales.

    Conversely, if they are the cause, I think we all know what'll happen.

    October 11, 2007 04:15 pm at 4:15 pm |
1 2 3