Deniers bringing politics to the classroom

[konradv]

To Teach or Not to Teach? Global Warming Petition Sparks Debate at School Board Meeting

They're using Creationist tactics to try and force their version of science into the classrooms!

 

[Old Rocks]

Of course they are using those tactics. For, like the creationists, the science is totally against their point of view. So, rather than argueing the science, they are trying to prevent the science from being taught at all.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah let's teach kids that the only way to get anything done is to let big government tax the shit out of us all in the name of saving the planet.

And they won't teach that even if the United States reverted to the fucking stone age that it wouldn't even put a dent in CO2 emissions as long as China India and the rest of the developing world is expanding.

 

[Si modo]

To Teach or Not to Teach? Global Warming Petition Sparks Debate at School Board Meeting

They're using Creationist tactics to try and force their version of science into the classrooms!

What is a denier denying?

Note: This is an automated message.

 

[konradv]

Yeah let's teach kids that the only way to get anything done is to let big government tax the shit out of us all in the name of saving the planet.

What a bullshit, nothing comment. That isn't being taught and only goes to prove that the deniers only have the political option to go with, having failed miserably in proving the science wrong.

 

[random3434]

What if a classroom teacher taught both points of view, and let the student decide for themselves?

What a novel concept!

 

[konradv]

To Teach or Not to Teach? Global Warming Petition Sparks Debate at School Board Meeting

They're using Creationist tactics to try and force their version of science into the classrooms!

What is a denier denying?

Note: This is an automated message.

I should reply to SPAM???

 

[konradv]

What if a classroom teacher taught both points of view, and let the student decide for themselves?

What a novel concept!

What if they just taught the science? You don't teach points of view, you teach the facts!

 

[Skull Pilot]

What if a classroom teacher taught both points of view, and let the student decide for themselves?

What a novel concept!

Don't make me laugh. Government schools teach what the government wants them to teach. The last thing the fucking government wants is a population that can think for itself.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There's no room for the religion of Global Warming in Public Schools; it's indoctrination plain and simple

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah let's teach kids that the only way to get anything done is to let big government tax the shit out of us all in the name of saving the planet.

What a bullshit, nothing comment. That isn't being taught and only goes to prove that the deniers only have the political option to go with, having failed miserably in proving the science wrong.

Tell me when was the last time you heard a sky is falling global warming announcement that didn't call for big government intervention?

 

[Old Rocks]

Yeah let's teach kids that the only way to get anything done is to let big government tax the shit out of us all in the name of saving the planet.

And they won't teach that even if the United States reverted to the fucking stone age that it wouldn't even put a dent in CO2 emissions as long as China India and the rest of the developing world is expanding.

Who said anything about policy response? It was about whether we are warming at all, and if we are, what is the cause.

It has been established beyond doubt that we are warming very rapidly. And established beyond a reasonable doubt that the GHGs that we have introduced into the atmosphere is the primary driver of that warming.

As far as policy response goes, that belongs in Political Science classes.

 

[Si modo]

To Teach or Not to Teach? Global Warming Petition Sparks Debate at School Board Meeting

They're using Creationist tactics to try and force their version of science into the classrooms!

What is a denier denying?

Note: This is an automated message.

I should reply to SPAM???

Reply to the question. I've asked you so many times what a denier is denying, you keep dodging it.

What is a denier denying?

 

[Si modo]

Yeah let's teach kids that the only way to get anything done is to let big government tax the shit out of us all in the name of saving the planet.

What a bullshit, nothing comment. That isn't being taught and only goes to prove that the deniers only have the political option to go with, having failed miserably in proving the science wrong.

What is a denier denying?

 

[Old Rocks]

What if a classroom teacher taught both points of view, and let the student decide for themselves?

What a novel concept!

EZ, What if teach students both astronomy and astrology, and let them decide for themselves?

This is not a point of view, this is established science. So stated by the US National Academy of Sciences, and all the other National Academies of Sciences of other nations.

Again, what we chose to do about it is policy, and debatabe. The fact that it is warming, and that GHGs are the primary cause is established science.

 

[Oddball]

Yeah let's teach kids that the only way to get anything done is to let big government tax the shit out of us all in the name of saving the planet.

And they won't teach that even if the United States reverted to the fucking stone age that it wouldn't even put a dent in CO2 emissions as long as China India and the rest of the developing world is expanding.

Who said anything about policy response? It was about whether we are warming at all, and if we are, what is the cause.

It has been established beyond doubt that we are warming very rapidly. And established beyond a reasonable doubt that the GHGs that we have introduced into the atmosphere is the primary driver of that warming.

As far as policy response goes, that belongs in Political Science classes.

What's been established beyond any doubt is that many of the "scientists" have been exaggerating and making numbers up out of whole cloth.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'm in favor of subjecting the religion of AGW to Scientific scrutiny. Let's the kids do my proposed fishtank experiment where they put in tiny traces of dry ice (CO2) in a tank while also keeping a control tank with regular air and see if there is an increase in temperature and hurricanes in the CO2 tank.

Let's do that!

 

[Si modo]

Yeah let's teach kids that the only way to get anything done is to let big government tax the shit out of us all in the name of saving the planet.

And they won't teach that even if the United States reverted to the fucking stone age that it wouldn't even put a dent in CO2 emissions as long as China India and the rest of the developing world is expanding.

....

And established beyond a reasonable doubt that the GHGs that we have introduced into the atmosphere is the primary driver of that warming. .....

Where has this been "established beyond a reasonable doubt"? Citations of the peer-reviewed science demonstrating this, please.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yeah let's teach kids that the only way to get anything done is to let big government tax the shit out of us all in the name of saving the planet.

What a bullshit, nothing comment. That isn't being taught and only goes to prove that the deniers only have the political option to go with, having failed miserably in proving the science wrong.

What is a denier denying?

Well, depends on the flavor of the denier.

Some state that there is no warming at all. That there is a vast conspriracy to misinform the public worldwide.

Others state that the warming is occurring, but is from natural causes. But they cannot point out any of the causes.

Others fly in the face of established physics, and state that CO2, CH4, and the rest of the GHGs really do not affect anything when they are in the atmosphere.

And then there are some that claim scientific credentials, and just mewl and puke about logic, and never say a thing that they can be pinned down on.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yeah let's teach kids that the only way to get anything done is to let big government tax the shit out of us all in the name of saving the planet.

And they won't teach that even if the United States reverted to the fucking stone age that it wouldn't even put a dent in CO2 emissions as long as China India and the rest of the developing world is expanding.

....

And established beyond a reasonable doubt that the GHGs that we have introduced into the atmosphere is the primary driver of that warming. .....

Where has this been "established beyond a reasonable doubt"? Citations of the peer-reviewed science demonstrating this, please.

National Academy of Sciences


ACC Panel on Advancing the Science of Climate Change

Advancing the Science of Climate Change

A strong, credible body of scientific evidence shows that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems, concludes this panel report from the America's Climate Choices suite of studies. As decision makers respond to these risks, the nation's scientific enterprise can contribute both by continuing to improve understanding of the causes and consequences of climate change, and by improving and expanding the options available to limit the magnitude of climate change and adapt to its impacts. To make this possible, the nation needs a comprehensive, integrated, and flexible climate change research enterprise that is closely linked with action-oriented programs at all levels