http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/worl...-Peace.html?hp

Rock on!

I think this is cool, not just because it secures my job for the next decade or so. I support the fact that they broaden the definition of 'peace' to other globally significant matters. IMHO, if we're all going to go down sooner rather than later because we screwed up the climate, it doesn't really matter whether we go down in peace (is that an option anyway?) or in war.
But I do realize that this is quite a hypocrite statement, never having lived in a country at war myself.

Yes, but climate change and its associated problems will eventually cause massive strife, whether it is about water access in dry areas or about hundreds of thousands of refugees moving elsewhere, does not matter, it will cause sociological problems and maybe even war.

Anyway, a great achievement for IPCC and the thousands of scientists who have contributed to it over the last 15-20 years or so!

Do you work for the IPCC then?

only in my dreams...

(I am a paleo-climatologist, though)

but what do you think about Al Gore getting half the prize?

I think there are a lot more deserving people who actually work in the field of climate change mitigation policy (like me ) . I understand using it as a tool to bring the subject "out in the open", but most people understand it.
So what did gore do? made a film! well at least it was carbon neutral!

Are you sure

I'm not necessarily a big Al Gore fan, and I do think he's been given too much credit, but fact is that the IPCC and climate scientists have been trying to get attention for this subject for over 20 years now (first IPCC report came out in 1990), with limited success. It's not until a guy like Al Gore comes along and uses his public profile for the cause, that awareness is rising and discussions about CC are unavoidable, even for the most stern contrarians. I don't like the fact that this is the case, but I do appreciate the outcome.

I can't put it out of my head how much better off we would have been, if people actually had started listening 20 years ago. Inertia creeps, unfortunately.

So Al Gore did do a very good job of bringing climate change science to the masses, something that us scientists just have not been good at, but it is great that the Nobel committee acknowledged the collaborative nature of science by awarding the IPCC the prize as well. I'm just wondering though how do all the scientists who contributed to the IPCC report split the money?

Best reaction I have seen to Gore winning the Nobel prize for peace:

"At least they are consistent. Previous winners (in other categories maybe) include Gerry Adams and Yasser Arafat."

http://www.talkclimatechange.com

I'd say it was a better choice than the current vice president of the USA. And scarcities of ressources, caused by climate change, are a potential source of conflict.

Still I'd salute it if next year's Nobel Prize for peace would be awarded for lifework efforts, in the long run it would be better for its reputation.

Seeing how Ariel Sharon, Yasser Arafat, and Henry Kissinger (!) have all won the Nobel Peace prizes in the past, the prize is nothing but a sham and i am more worried about the people who receive it than the ones who don't.