Al Gore wins a Nobel Prize for projecting global warming, and gets called a wanna-be for his efforts.

FP: What are your own personal thoughts on global warming? And what do you think of Al Gore in general and what his main motives are when it comes to this issue?

Hayward: The world is warming, and human civilization probably plays a role in this (though that role may have more to do with land use changes than greenhouse gas emissions, which would mean the warming is about over), but it is a much more modest and manageable problem than Gore and his fellow alarmists argue. I think Gore is a deeply problematic person and thinker. I wrote a long paper last fall (which you can find here) in which I make out Gore as an epigone of Heidegger. Gore believes man is separated from nature by technology, and his calls for "changing human consciousness" are really quite amazing, and potentially totalitarian in its implications, though I do not think he has any understanding of the implications of his own attempt at "deep" thinking on these matters.

FP: If Gore doesn’t deserve a Peace Prize, what does he deserve?

Hayward: Monty Python's Upper Class Twit of the Year Award.

  ¶ 9:14 AM