Also, as for why I think he got it, this is something I posted elsewhere, in response to someone wondering why he got it, and what his work had to do with peace:
"well, needless to say that there is a lot involved in co-awarding him the pirze.
as for the Peace factor....well let's see. Global warming is largely caused by green houses gases, which come from fossil fuels. So there's coal. Ok, we're not at war with West Virginia (yet). Then there's oil. Hmmm. Oil. That seems to be the cause for some, uh, ill will in the world. Sure, most of ours comes from Canada, but the most (overall) comes from Saudi Arabi. The Saudis own about 10% of the US debt. Hmmm. Money. Oil. Wars.
so advocating for the recognition of global warming, its causes and for other means of energy use and conservation might facilitate peace?
do you know what Alfred Nobel made his money on, and why he created this prize as his legacy?"
Part 2 (In response to a comment that the Nobel Prize has sold out like the Oscars)
"Ok let me take this one step deeper for you.
It's about the world view towards the United States in general, and the pre-schoolers in the Administration specifically. Much, well all, of the extreme religious world (except our lapdog, Israel) hates us. Maybe because we don't have our women folk live like prisoners their whole lives or because we shower or don't kill as many fags. Whatever, they hate us.
Now, the rest of the world (with the exception of our lapdog, Israel and "yes" man, Great Britain) has taken some degree of umbrage at our action in Iraq and elsewhere. What troubles them more is our attitude towards Iran, but let's keep this on action. (And not on inaction because then we'd get into the morality the situations of oil-poor nations/regions liuke Myanmar and Darfur). In brief - even our allies have become skeptics. They all have an agenda but they keep it on the backburner. (One has to wonder if oil-rich Norway sees itself in our sights). For the most part, this skepticism is about the Bush administration. But who here reads the foregin press?
No, we have our press, which for the most part is a screaming match between News Corp. and The NY Times, and Ann Coulter and Al Franken. Only after the Democratic takeover of Congress has the American media taken the smallest baby steps towards actual, sustained criticism of the Administration - prior to that it was Abu Ghraib (remember that) and not much else. It's been an exhaustive campaign against the press on the part of the Administration - how many press secretaries have their been? Ari Fleischer anyone? Hell, they even had to let Helen Thomas ask a question.
So the point of this is that the Administration has done a great job of deflecting negative press and also at generating it when needed. The American media is still skittish. The foregin press is not. But how often do we listen to the foreign press? I say, about, twice a year - the Nobel Prize, and the Golden Globes. So if you wanted to make an indictment of an Administration in the US, then how about the buzz around giving the Nobel Prize to the man who was actually elected president?
Now the Golden Globes - not a joke here. Just a segue to shore up this point. Who is the other natural nemesis of Washington? Hollywood! (except Reagan who was never much of an actor). Hollywood! with it's liberal Jews and fags and ungodly amounts of money derived from making movies with explosions and guns to feed the appetities of the people who empower this Administration. Twisted, I know. Now, Hollywood had produced a lot of poignant (and a lot of stupid) movies over the years to push a liberal agenda, no doubt. But the next time you are at the movies, just watch the trailers. There are at least three big budget movies based upon the war, but which are really critical of it and of our policies. When will these movies be coming out? Well, they are nicely spaced through primary season and up to the general election. Now, is this by chance? What others will be coming out?"