Skip to comments.Global Warming Heats Up In The Classroom
Posted on 02/04/2012 4:56:29 AM PST by IbJensen
The debate over global warming is now entering the classroom and its proponents are alarmed. It seems the dogma of the existence of global warming is running into problems as boards of education in several states have established a standard that requires the presentation of climate change denial as a valid scientific position. Legislators in other states have introduced bills that require equal time for climate change skeptics views in the classroom. With new national science standards from kindergarten through twelfth grade due by the end of 2012, we can expect to see a heated debate over climate change appear more often in court and in the classroom.
The National Center for Science Educations [NCSE] is challenging such restrictions. It seems anyone who so much as questions the reality of man-made climate change is in a psychological state of denial of established science. The Centers education initiative  seeks to impose the climate change agenda upon our school children leaving no room for scientific method or debate.
In the opinion of the NCSE, there is virtually unanimous scientific agreement about climate change. What is this claim founded upon and who are the renowned scientists that signed on to this statement? It seems NCSE has simply dismissed all those who disagree with climate change theory.
Note that no figure of the percentage of scientists in agreement is given, perhaps because they deem the number to be so insignificant. A simple exaggerated statement suffices to provide all the emotional arguments to justify their agenda.
An excellent article in the Wall Street Journal, titled No Need to Panic About Global Warming claims theres no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to decarbonize the worlds economy. It clearly states, that in fact a growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are required and that CO2 is not only, not a pollutant, but it is a key component of our biospheres life cycle.
Happily, the climate change program is finding a substantial amount of resistance among students across the country as well. A poll conducted last November by the National Science Teachers Association [NSTA], found that 82 percent of students surveyed demonstrated skepticism regarding climate change and 26 percent of teachers administrators showed the same tendency.
Nevertheless, climate change advocates in education keep repeating the same old slogans. With a persistence almost worthy of admiration, one might conclude that some of these educators are following the advice of Robespierre: The secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant.
The only way this garbage should be allowed in the classroom is as an example of bad science trying to be adopted through political hysteria.
This is too hard to follow.
A system that allows homosexuals to present their stories of the glories of butt-humping would certainly allow junk science designed to line the pockets of socialist fatheads by taxing the hell out of the uninformed.
Selling the propaganda to the young and impressionable. So much like the Nazis
Gee...I thought classrooms were places where students examined dueling ideas. You know...learned how to think critically?
As in...making up their own minds.
I know, I know...that’s pretty old fashioned...and probably racist.
These people are sick, twisted SOBs. I recall at 12 years old in the early 70s, they told us by the year 2000 we would be living in an ace ice, no one would live past 40 years old and we’d be reduced to cannibalism.
Their motivation is nothing more than psychological intimidation and these sick-o’s apparently get their jollies from scaring young children. Nothing but punks and perverts.
There is a portion of the population that considers such debates, if they become heated, as *rude*.
I don’t know when or where this began, but I first experienced about 10 years ago in a family setting. My brother and I got into a debate on something (I forget the topic). We were smiling and laughing and throwing quick responses at each other. I said:”I’ve been missing this” and He said:”Me, too.” Then we glanced over at our spouses, both of whom were sitting there with grim expressions and arms folded across their chests. We assured them we weren’t angry with each other. We were told that we *sounded* angry and it was rude. Perhaps because it excluded them? I don’t know, because that took all the fun out of it, so we stopped.
These were educated, white people in their late 50s. My husband is a conservative. My brother and his wife are liberals who still live a conservative lifestyle.
Maybe it is just a family thing. My son and I were having a similar sort of discussion and I found out later that his wife thought he was going to “get in trouble” for speaking as he did to me. Our family style was to be able to say anything as long as it wasn’t personally insulting and as long as someone could back up their assertions with facts and present those facts in a logical manner. My DIL is quick to label most personal inquiries about jobs and finances as “rude”, although she won’t say this to my face. Again, these are educated people.
I have chalked it up to upper-Midwestern Norwegians, but perhaps it has actually become embedded into society? It puzzles me and I find I have become much quieter in discussions. About all I say these days is:”Well, we don’t agree.” As I think about it, no one ever asks for my conclusions or supporting evidence, regardless of the topic. Admitting to non-agreement usually means the topic is dropped. I have encountered anger when stating facts that are diametrically opposed to “the consensus”. It took me awhile to accept, but disagreement is not allowed in “polite society”.
Some conservative friends were shocked recently to discover their liberal extended, urban family finds them rude and ignorant and a source of embarrassment because they are rural and conservative. Our friends have a professional scientific doctorate and a Masters degree and have successful private veterinary practice. Both are very well-spoken and capable of witticisms in the course of these sorts of discussions.
It may start in the schools. I had also noticed, years ago, that many urban parents became re-educated during the time their children were in k-12. While we would sit our children down and discuss the fallacies they were being taught, our relatives were adopting the children’s pc lessons for themselves.
And it's the usual suspects pandering their usual BS for their fixed goal of total domination through confiscatory taxation. The “cause” always shifts but the “cure” is always the same; group-think and massive taxation to “fix” the end-of-the-world problem.
Of course, these self-styled philosopher-kings will receive and administer all of this money & power for "the common good" because they are so brilliant. It must be true. Just ask them about their IQ!
Oh yes. Our public school system has been totally preempted to become one of the instruments for destroying humanity’s last bastion of freedom. It’s method is to destroy the bedrock of our western civilization by indoctrinating the children that there are no absolutes. Other institutions so preempted are churches, news media, and entertainment media.
It’s all part of the plan.