A Voice of Reason: Sane Views for a Crazy World

March 19, 2007

Global Warming Indoctrination in the Schools?

Found this post on Wake Up America, about how only the global warming due to carbon emissions is being taught in the public schools. 

 To which I had a reply!

The biggest problem in education, and being in it I know, is that the general public has accepted the entire arguement of global warming being particularly caused by carbon emissions as a fact, and not a theory.

In my classes, I teach history, I have decided to show from the historical record the times that Earth has shifted in climate due to a natural process, and not related to carbon emissions.

While I remain firmly undecided, and support reform in energy policy from a strategic perspective, and also from a consumer and stewardship perspective, the lack of debate on this topic, at least known to the public at large is an incredible travesty of the scientific community.

While climate change does seem to be occurring, and this is disconcerting, the lack of a well rounded presentation, particulary in the classroom has resulted in the de facto propagandization of the public.

It is time for  reasonable, multfaceted, empirically based arguments to be presented to the public, and particularly to school children.  Currently, this phenomena is being taught as fact, when it is in fact, theory.

Oh, and I don’t support teaching “Intelligent Design” in public schools, for those who would think I am a bit off the reservation.  However, I think evolution should be taught as a theory.  With all its holes presented. 

11 Comments »

  1. Hmm… this seems to be a major problem in America. We take whole what the culture police, drive-by media (to borrow Rush’s phrase, if I may), and Hollywood tells us. No question asked, no refund available.

    I guess I’m a bit off the reservation. I believe in intelligent design. Just wondering, if they are both theories, why you support teaching one and not the other?

    Comment by thelonedrifter — March 19, 2007 @ 5:08 am | Reply

  2. ID has part and parcel a danger of invoking religious beliefs, so I am wary of it. Also, there are some fairly radical branches of ID, dinosaurs living with men, etc., which I find a bit of a stretch. I will confess I am not an expert in this theory, but what I have read, from their point of view has left me a bit unconvinced.

    I also believe in a modified type of evolution, so there is a bias, but mine is not for example the view, which more evidence arises to counter, that there are major inter-genus changes.

    The changes that come about are based on haplogroups of DNA, so I would contend that modern man, and the genetic record is starting to show this, evolved within their own group, and not the traditional view, which has the big holes – missing links etc.

    Here’s a pretty interesting piece I found in Newsweek recently:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17542627/site/newsweek/

    Comment by avoiceofreason — March 19, 2007 @ 5:46 am | Reply

  3. “While I remain firmly undecided, and support reform in energy policy from a strategic perspective, and also from a consumer and stewardship perspective, the lack of debate on this topic, at least known to the public at large is an incredible travesty of the scientific community.”

    Sounds like a good position to take.

    What makes me wary of this debate is the tyrannical nature that its proponents have adopted recently. With the head of the Weather Channel calling for meteorologists who disagree to lose their credentials- this seems like the kind of thing that people without factual support do.

    Comment by totaltransformation — March 19, 2007 @ 1:05 pm | Reply

  4. It seems both sides of the Global Warming issue are playing dirty politics. I think you’re right to link it with evolution as the same politics is played in that game also. The groups are different groups, the games are the same.

    I’m not a scientist, but it seems to me that we have a responsibility to take care of this earth and preserve it for future generations. I’m not saying I believe that Global Warming exists. There will be those who think me myopic, so be it.

    Taking care of the earth takes several forms. Yes, we need to cut carbon emmissions. Yes we need to reduce toxic wastes (in the air, the streams, the oceans and on land). We must take care to balance these needs with the needs of people. Jobs must be protected. I drive a lot. My job requires it. I can do my part to reduce driving, but I can’t cut it out all together.

    Instead of talking about Global Warming, schools should focuse on environmental stewardship. Who cares how we got here, that’s just looking for someone to blame. Instead, what can we do to improve?

    My father-in-law taught me one time that you should “return a little to the earth what you took out of the earth”. That means recycling leaves, etc in his mind, but it’s a bigger picture than that.

    Regarding evolution, I’ve seen too many changes over the years to believe in this theory. I’ve heard reports of Carbon-14 dating and newer methods giving false information so that I don’t trust any of that data. The bottom line is that nothing can be proven scientifically. I was taught that the scientific method required observation, who was there to OBSERVE evolution? No one.

    Evolution, intelligent design, why teach either? Or teach both (and creation too for that matter). Too much of school is wasted on these debates and should be focused on reading. Reading these blogs, gives me more insight. If I choose to read about evolution or creation, I can learn more on those subjects. Schools should focus on giving students the tools, not just on giving one-sided theories.

    Comment by Randy — March 19, 2007 @ 3:25 pm | Reply

  5. I believe that is precisely the argument made by proponents of teaching evolution only. There is only so much time in a classroom. Why waste it going over every alternative theory out there? You confuse the students more than you need to. Evolution is the main theory so just teach that.

    Comment by hydralisk — March 19, 2007 @ 4:37 pm | Reply

  6. Great strategy on giving proper balance to the flaws in the global warming theory.

    Comment by Neil — March 19, 2007 @ 6:19 pm | Reply

  7. […] Update: Voice of Reason examines propaganda from the pro-side here. […]

    Pingback by Global Warming and its Critics « Den of Hydralisks — March 19, 2007 @ 6:43 pm | Reply

  8. Good read!..I agree with this comment: Hmm… this seems to be a major problem in America. We take whole what the culture police, drive-by media (to borrow Rush’s phrase, if I may), and Hollywood tells us. No question asked, no refund available..true true!

    Comment by Angel — March 19, 2007 @ 6:59 pm | Reply

  9. Def agree with your view.

    Comment by entersandman — March 19, 2007 @ 7:54 pm | Reply

  10. I agree 100 percent with your position on global warming. I am as wary of blind faith as much as a head in the sand. I also support (private!) research into alternative energy sources (considering that fossil fuels are a scarce resource, mightn’t alternative energy be an attractive, even prudent investment?).

    I might suggest to you Michael Crichton’s Book STATE OF FEAR. Certainly it is a work of fiction, but much of the science Mr. Crichton uses in the story is well cited in his extensive annotated bibliography. The story part is a bit thin (the main characters almost die 3 times within 80 pages), but is clearly a framework with which to present evidence contrary to the doctrine from the cult of global warming. Mr. Crichton’s purpose, as he states in an appendix, is to point out how dangerous it can be when science gets too politicized. Plus, it’s fun to see a book in which enviro-terrorists are the bad guys!

    Comment by Pink Elephant — March 19, 2007 @ 10:59 pm | Reply

  11. I will look it up when I have some time to read for enjoyment. Life is so busy, work, blog, take care of the house, blog…
    You get the picture!

    Comment by avoiceofreason — March 20, 2007 @ 6:27 am | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: