David Suzuki wins honorary "Alternative Nobel"

Tue, 2009-10-13 06:45Richard Littlemore
Richard Littlemore's picture

David Suzuki wins honorary "Alternative Nobel"

Canadian environmental icon David Suzuki has won the honorary Right Livelihood Award, sometimes called the Alternative Nobel prize, “for his lifetime advocacy of the socially responsible use of science, and for his massive contribution to raising awareness about the perils of climate change and building public support for policies to address it.”

Contrasted, say, to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, whose climate change policies are currently an embarrassment to the country and an affront to the world, David Suzuki was also named this year as the person Canadians trust most. He outpolled the Queen and Rick Hillier (former Chief of Defence Staff) - combined.

Full disclosure: One of the founders of this blog, Jim Hoggan, is chair of the David Suzuki Foundation (DSF). Another of the founders, John Lefebvre, is also a generous supporter of Suzuki’s. I personally got hooked on the climate change issue because the DSF hired me as a freelance writer in 1996 to write its first public education package on climate change. We all like, admire and respect Suzuki unreservedly. Just for the record.

Comments

I personally was hoping suzuki would lose but its okay because the big climate scare is over. People are finding out that CO2 is harmless.

What on earth are you reading (or smoking) that supports these silly statements you keep posting? And please don't fall back on Climate Audit or WUWT. Something from a credible source -- maybe Science or one of the National Scientific Academies . . .

Just another idiot

Congratulations, he deserves it.

He should have done what McIntyre did, expose bad science.

I have to conclude that Suzuki is only in it for the money. Any scince competence he had has been withered away for lack of use.

My recommendation is don't let your kids be exposed to anything Suzuki is involved with. Tell you kids that Suzuki and Al gore are both alarmists who love making money off of scaring people.

A shame really. i used to think he was OK. Now.. just a shadow of himself. McIntye is the real scientist. McIntyre should get a Nobel price for exposing the AGW team falsehoods. A true David and Golieth story.

You didn't read the link, did you, smear-boy? Suzuki was not given money with this award, but he was honoured as he deserves.

clueless, gullible McI sycophant.

Damn! You figured it out EdB. God, here we all thought we could keep this a secret, but noooooo...smarty pants EdB had to spoil it all by figuring out that David Suzuki and Al Gore are actually the richest two people on earth, and their plans for a socialist one world govenrment have been slowly coming to fruition thanks to the election of Obama. When this conspiracy gets out on wider scale it's going to defeat all our hard work! I had just signed up another new member to the AGW cause too. Now, thanks to EdB, my dream of signing up the most new members in my city so that I can win a toaster oven is in serious jeopardy.

Damn you EdB!

The best thing about Suzuki is that he spends much of his time teaching good science, unlike the miserable denialists who spend their time smearing good people and good scientists.

I like the guy based on the fact that he is a true believer environmentalist who basically thinks we should take care of nature in a better way.

True, all enviros tend to come across as a little self righteous as does the white bearded wonder, but I still think he's okay.

His popularity with Canadians is a result of 2 things. 1 He's good and likeable on TV and 2 he never runs for political office and so his enviro beliefs don't pose any real threat to anybody.

Femack explain to me what is being done to stop global warming. Do you realize just by responding to what I write, you are contributing to global warming. This is because you use a computer, which uses electricity which probably comes from a coal plant. You are not doing anything to stop global warming, nor are any of the writers for this website. You may as well start handing out ribbons like they do for breast cancer. Maybe that's the answer, hand out stupid ribbons.

As a matter of fact, my electricity does not come from a coal plant, but let's leave that aside. Your comments here are all over the map, badly informed and ill-mannered. Your main purpose seems to be to offend as many people as possible and goad them into responding. Don't smirk. I am aware of the irony. If you really wanted to know what's being done about CO2 emissions, you could find out easily enough. Europe is doing a great job compared to Canada's no-show. Australia has thrown out its Bush-friendly administration and is finally addressing the issue.

If I thought you were asking a serious question I would respond in kind. It isn't worth my time, but here's a wee sample: google "wind farm Wolfe Island".

And BTW, breast cancer awareness campaigns, including those "stupid ribbons," have saved thousands of lives. And no smart remarks -- I know what I'm talking about on that score.

shooshmon is clueless that there are areas of North America that generate little and even zero of their electricity from fossil carbon fuels.

But then ignorance in a global warming/climate change denier is no surprise.

you can learn all about where American power comes from from that handy friendly map at americanpower.org ... plus they're nice and coal friendly ;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Canada
Quebec produces barely 2.1% of it's electricity from coal, petroleum and natural gas combined.
Manitoba produces 4.3% from coal, petroleum and natural gas combined.
British Columbia produces 10.1% from coal, petroleum and natural gas combined.
Ontario produces 24.6% from coal, petroleum and natural gas combined.
Nefoundland produces 26.7% from coal, petroleum and natural gas combined, while Labrador produces 0%.

That means 26,777,000 out of 33,331,400 Canadians live in jurisdictions that get a quarter or less of their electricity form non-fossil fuel sources.

PM Harper's climate change policies are reflective of what Canadians generally want. In a country where the Green Party can not elect a single member, our government's attitude looks spot on.

I have to protest the down tick ratings on the above comment.

The negative ratings arise from the sentiment that Harper is out of step with Canadians on climate.

No - Harper reads (or leads) Canadians pretty well on climate. His problem is he's just not all that likable. Thats why he's singing Beatles songs instead of singing about CO2. He's trying to shore up his major weakness with Canadians.

The reason he can't form a majority government has nothing to do with climate. People just aren't entirely comfortable with the guy on a basic human level.

Harper does not read Canadians well and is leading very badly, especially on the world stage and most especially over climate change.

False. Canadians are way ahead of the dinosaur Harperites who will not face reality.

Well, the Harperites are in power. And if we had a snap election, the Harperites would be back in power. That is the current reality regarding Canada's position on drastic C02 reductions.

They are a minority government and they act like they are governing only for the minority of Canadians who were dumb enough to vote for them. They are misappropriating taxpayers' dollars to advertise their Party.

yep - and when Iggy came out west talking clean energy, a conservative mp was only too anxious to laugh him off pointing out that Canadian issues are crime and the economy - not climate - and he's right - climate just isn't playing with the public at large right now.

False. You do not speak for Canadians, and as an Albertan, I also say you are not speaking for me. I don't care about crime particularly, and I consider the economy a subset of the environment.

of course I don't speak for you. I just gave an opinion of what I believe is the mindset of a good number of Canadians. If a person says "Canadians believe this or that" - obviously it is opinion and there are exceptions.

If I say "Canadians don't believe in space aliens" It's a true statement but of course many do believe in space aliens.