First some of the more boring less interesting stuff.

Chemistry: Venkatraman Ramakrishna, Thomas A. Steitz, Ada E. Yonath

"for studies of the structure and function of the ribosome"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_in_Chemistry

Physics: Charles K. Kao
"for groundbreaking achievements concerning the transmission of light in fibers for optical communication"

Willard S. Boyle (CANADA YEAAAAH), George E. Smith

"for the invention of an imaging semiconductor circuit – the CCD sensor"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_in_Physics

Medicine/ Physiology: Elizabeth H. Blackburn, Carol W. Greider, Jack W. Szostak

"for the discovery of how chromosomes are protected by telomeres and the enzyme telomerase"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Priz ... r_Medicine

Literature: Herta Müller

"who, with the concentration of poetry and the frankness of prose, depicts the landscape of the dispossessed"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_in_Literature

And now the controversy....

Peace: Barack Obama

"for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Peace_Prize

---

Thoughts?

As I've said in numerous discussions on this subject, they're clearly jumping the gun. He hasn't done enough to earn it yet. While I'm sure we all have high hopes that he might, they're awarding on that hope, not on his achievements so far. I've also heard entirely plausible suggestions that they're trying to manipulate him into living up to his Peace Prize, which, while understandable, is well outside the remit of the awarding committee.

In order to win a Nobel science prize, you have to be truly terrifyingly brilliant, change the world, and wait a couple of decades for the effects of your discovery to be felt before getting the prize. I don't see why the Peace Prize should be any different.

But then, I thought it was a bit of a joke anyway.

The hell!?! He hasn't done anything!! Sure he's said he'll do certain things, and may do so in the future, but shouldn't it be awarded actual achievements? Like what the other candidates have, actual achievements.

This is retarded and probably more of a publicity stunt than anything else. Grr. I was already pissed that Gore won it for doing pretty much nothing, this is even more ridiculous.

People are stupid.

---

Also:
'Prime Minister Stephen Harper stated "President Obama's efforts and vision to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people are applauded by all Canadians"'

Is not.

It is pretty pathetic that they just kinda handed it out to him. The third sitting American president to receive the prize, too.

A comment on twitter on this topic-
'I thought the only thing you won for making empty speeches about world peace was Miss World.'
Well, i don't think Obama made empty speeches but like everyone else I think it is ridiculous. Way too early.
And the choices of the selection committee sucks. Henry Kissinger got the Nobel Peace Prize, for god's sake! He is accused of war crimes!
And Gandhi never got it. Apparently, he was nominated 4 times, but he never won it. He was the single guy in the world who deserved it the most! Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Junior, Dalai Lama & Obama all claim to have been inspired by him (ironically all 4 have won the Peace Prize). And lets not forget Hitler was nominated for it too.

---

BTW, Venkataraman Ramakrishan, the guy who won the Nobel prize in chemistry this year, was a visiting professor to the Indian Institute of Science, Banglore. My uncle (who is the head of the physics/maths department there) got to meet him after the awards. Cool, meeting a Nobel laureate!

That is pretty cool.

Ghandi probably would have won it the last time. But he was nominated right before his assassination, and they don't give the award posthumously. That year they didn't choose a winner.

There does seem like there's always been a lot of controversy over peace prize winner.

When Gore got it, I gave up on the Peace Prize.

Even people at school (some, I admit, aren't really qualified to answer) who like Obama thought this was stupid; mom told me the morning she knew, I laughed my way out of the door.
I'm glad the guy won is for the CCD sensor, just seems like it took awhile.

Dansariki wrote:I'm glad the guy won is for the CCD sensor, just seems like it took awhile.

*Canada dance*

FuzzyLobster wrote:That is pretty cool.

Ghandi probably would have won it the last time. But he was nominated right before his assassination, and they don't give the award posthumously. That year they didn't choose a winner.

There does seem like there's always been a lot of controversy over peace prize winner.

It is Gandhi, Fuzzy. Not Ghandi. I have seen quite a few foreigners call him that, is that some sort of alternate spelling for him?

It's just a weird word if you're used to English spelling. We know there's an "h" in there somewhere and that seems to be a more obvious place to put it.

Does anyone feel Obama should have not accepted the prize? Saying that he did not deserve it?

Yep. Absolutely. We must keep in mind that this is not his fault, just the Nobel Review Board or whatever they're called.

Yes, he should have.

Sorry about the spelling. I'd have thought after spelling it wrong about a dozen times in WR, I'd have gotten the idea. *facepalm*

I think Iggy doesn't want to offend anyone. All our party leaders are like that. Grrr.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/busin ... el.html?hp

Economics revealed.

Can you please try and link things from sites that don't make you register? BBC article.

Sentynel wrote:Can you please try and link things from sites that don't make you register? BBC article.

o.O

I don't have to register...

Neither do I.

(I think it's because he's... you know... European)

I didn't have to register too. Only Europeans =p.