The Nobel Committee awarded the 2007 Peace Prize to former US Vice President Al Gore and the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change.” The decision is mind-boggling because both are alarmist and their views exaggerated, based on scant evidence.
The United Nations Commission (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC) has for example revised some of its forecasts. In February at a conference on climate it suggested that sea levels would rise by 38 cm by 2100, which is down from the 48 cm it predicted in 2001m and even lower than the 68 cm it forecast in 1990. Similarly, IPCC President Rajendra Pachaur said he wanted to use the information to shake people and governments into doing something, which means engaging in alarmist behaviour.
An even greater form of alarmism is that of former US Vice-President Al Gore, who claimed in his film “An Inconvenient Truth” that sea levels would rise by seven metres (contradicting the UN panel), flooding Shanghai, Florida and the Netherlands, and that the Gulf Stream in the Atlantic would stop and push Europe into another Ice Age.
Climate experts say that scenario is very improbable. Although Gore’s movie was a smash at the box office it is considered unscientific and has been banned from screening in British schools.
For this reason the Nobel committee did not award him a Nobel Prize for Science. But why the Peace Prize? What contribution to peace did a politician-turned-environmentalist make, especially one who sees humans as the main cause for an imminent apocalypse and has nothing better to do than peddle birth control on people as way of stopping the problem?
Al Gore is in favour of abortion. For him abortion is an acceptable method of population control, like in China. His support for abortion has “religious” motivations.
In the past he has praised the Gaia Cult, the Earth, and the revival of primitive pagan cults.
Gaia supporters have charged humanity with exploiting the Earth’s resources for selfish purposes. They are anti-Christian because in their view Christianity freed the Earth from pagan myths and set in motion a process of unrestrained exploitation of nature.
In reality, as Benedict XVI pointed out, Christianity freed man from the yoke of myth and nature leading the way to scientific progress and mastery over the cosmos.
Environmental disasters are by contrast the result of a society that has moved away from God, a world of enlightenment that sees itself as the “master” rather than “keeper” of the Earth.
The result, a missionary told me, is that many UN officials on mission in Africa give out condoms and intrauterine devices to slow down the birth rate, whilst offering anti-Christian lessons because Christianity is guilty of defending people and the God of love of the Christians.
We fear that awarding this Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore is way of unleashing a war against man and God.