For someone who has a reputation for being boring and wooden, Al Gore certainly is polarizing.
Supporters assert that he has been one of the principal actors in bringing awareness to global warming and prompting governments and industry to take action against greenhouse emissions. While a lot of people became familiar with his work through the recent film "An Inconvenient Truth," Gore has been writing on the issue since the '80s.
Detractors, however, say he's an opportunist who exaggerates the scientific evidence and doesn't even follow his own advice. Witness the furor over reports that his mansion in Tennessee is an energy guzzler.
On Friday, Gore shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has been assembling comprehensive scientific reports and recommendations on global warming for the U.N. The prize has also revived talk that Gore may run for president in 2008.
"He is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted," said Ole Danbolt Mjos, chairman of the Nobel committee, as quoted in CNN.
But what do you think? Visionary or hypocrite? Does he deserve the prize? Write a comment in the TalkBack section. A poll will be up soon.