It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Portland schools ban textbooks that question climate change

page: 8
27
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Liquesence

I will tell ya whats 'disingenuous' is that for over 50 years green legislation has existed.

Since the GD Nixon administration the EPA has existed.

For over 100 years the STATE has had the power to REGULATE business. ( That's who we are really talking about by the way) when people say 'humans'.) They always out trying to kill people.!

So for over a HALF CENTURY with the state already in control of the air, and water, and land.

Someone needs to tell just what effing problem is there.

What more do the NEOCON fascists trying to control the entire planet WANT ?


Would you prefer to be china where you can't even breathe the air?




posted on May, 21 2016 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian



They also don't teach that the Loch Ness Monster is proof that dinosaurs survive in the modern age

Thanks , that is a very good logical progression to back up exactly what the OP is about. No , most would not teach on the "theory" of the Loch Ness monster because it is not "proven science"
. Too many disagreements ....Hmm sound familiar ? (and not enough money to be made off Nessie as opposed to "climate change")



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog




No , most would not teach on the "theory" of the Loch Ness monster because it is not "proven science"

Actually, there's a pretty substantial difference.
There is no evidence to support the existence of Nessie.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

They even use a brainwashed student to speak for them. Sad. I am sure that one will be an obedient little "global citizen", though, eh?

Silencing any opposition is the standard tactic for a lot of people, these days.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Gothmog




No , most would not teach on the "theory" of the Loch Ness monster because it is not "proven science"

Actually, there's a pretty substantial difference.
There is no evidence to support the existence of Nessie.

Well , there is some highly-disputed so- called "evidence". Get the picture ? Get it , got it , good.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

Are you trying to say the 'evidence' for nessie is similar to the evidence for AGW?



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Gothmog

Are you trying to say the 'evidence' for nessie is similar to the evidence for AGW?

Yep. The 2 situations are relatively comparable. And who said "I was trying" . Let me make this perfectly clear.....
I dont "try" to say anything . Just like the old Nike meme - I "Just DO It"

edit on 5/21/16 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

Well that is laughable at best, one side has worldwide studies all saying the same thing and the other has some faked pictures.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 08:00 PM
link   
So local school boards, local government, should not be able to set curriculum standards?

Who should do it? The State Department of Education?

Who should do it? The Federal Department of Education?

Is smaller local government only better when OP agrees?



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80
You are easily amused...but I guess climate change could be real . There is evidence of it throughout the millennia. ANd I just got to witness first-hand. Just powered up my storage expansion boxes , the other 2 PCs and the LED Tvs associated. Not to mention my work laptop. It got warm in my home office quick. Then I turned the thermostat down from 70 to 68 and it became cool in here again.


I found the answer to my climate change. I had forgotten that I had fired up a relaxing stick of incense . The CO2 released from it burning was precisely what caused my incident of climate change.
edit on 5/21/16 by Gothmog because: to add



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: theantediluvian



They also don't teach that the Loch Ness Monster is proof that dinosaurs survive in the modern age

Thanks , that is a very good logical progression to back up exactly what the OP is about. No , most would not teach on the "theory" of the Loch Ness monster because it is not "proven science"
. Too many disagreements ....Hmm sound familiar ? (and not enough money to be made off Nessie as opposed to "climate change")

the only science against global warming is paid for by exxon, mobil etc and based on, at best, hearsay.
'we reckon they're wrong! government paid stooges, buy our fuel!'



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: stinkelbaum



the only science against global warming is paid for by exxon, mobil etc and based on, at best, hearsay.

Really now...So you are saying these evil nasty companies were around a few thousand years ago ? Dang...I guess I dont know my pre-history .Checking now for the date these companies started.




posted on May, 21 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn

What about all the independent studies?

Even studies funded by political players like the Koch Bros. netted the same result as those performed by public and private research. If it were a lie created by the government scientists the world over would have figured it out by now. Unless you're trying to convince me that the vast majority of the worlds climate scientists are all bought and paid for by the US Government? All of them part of the conspiracy?

I know full well that the US Government has done next to NOTHING about this issue. Nor should they because all the government has the power to do is tax and spend. That's it. They are not in the business of coming up with solutions. My argument has always been that if you have a scientific problem, only scientific solutions(or at least mitigation) will suffice.

AGW is real. But so is the government's attempts at fleecing us over it.

It would be a disservice to our youth to deny them the most up to date scientific knowledge because some would rather play political games and muddy the waters.

Well I am a parent. I want my kids to be on the cutting edge of education. That may mean charter schools, private schools and some public schools. If my kids school started teaching creationism as a "balance" to evolutionary theory I would pull them out of that school.

You don't balance out scientific debates with denialism pseudoscience, and political hackery. You do it by testing the results of the data to see where it goes and form conclusions from that. The only scientific debate should be whether the data does or does not support a particular hypothesis and whether it fits in the overall theory.


It is not a conspiracy that I am wishing to convey, only that the reasoning behind there intentions to tax people due to something they claim is global warming is a farce. Those independent studies show what, the earth heating up,how about all the studies of the earth going cold, how about all the studies about the earth being just right. It is all nonsense, the earth is changing, will change and has been changing for many years 'naturally' nothing to do with us alone. The natural earth is heating the earth on its own and actually at a fastest rate then humans alone. I am talking all animals, bugs and everything else living on this planet other then ourselves is adding to the 'global warming' you speak of.

Raincheck for anyone thinking the school system teaches our children anything other then regurgitated information, information that is both out of date, however in date you think it is and just an overall waste to learn. English, maths, done. Now let the child or teenager learn what it wishes to ponder. That is the best tool anyone could give a child, not a prison like room with people telling them what they should achieve. Which is basically stacking shelves in a supermarket.

Science books, history books, its all old information and lies my friend. However just enough to keep people satisfied.


edit on 21-5-2016 by BlackProject because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye

Do you really know what they spend that money on? That would be a large misconception.

Money as a whole is a tool to control, it is not either here nor there. However if they take it from you or I, it disables us. Slows us down and we pay in our lifestyles. Those at the top of the tier do not suffer, they just move digits on a screen around. Most millionaires and billionaires feel privileged but they are again, even at the top tier of being used as advertisements for 'look what money can do for you' however it does nothing.

They tax you, you pay. Not an eye lid is flickered.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Textbooks still exist?

I'm pretty sure these papers proving climate change are written by trained scientists using tangible evidence. Maybe Portland needs better teachers.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:28 PM
link   
good, we changed text books when we learned the earth revolves around the sun rather than vice versa as well. we need to defend the future from indoctrinated ignorance. "Multiple studies published in peer reviewed scientific journals show that 97% or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: climate warming trends over the past century are extreamly likely due to human activities."* Thats very nearly everyone with the educational credentials to know what their talking about. let me just repeat that, 97% of qualified experts agree on this issue. There is no debate except among energy company shills, ignorant conservatives, and the politicians who pander for their votes. period.

the point of public education is to pass on the most current and consistant modern knowlege available, you cant get much more consistant than 97% agreement. to anyone who thinks its reasonable to present both sides so students can choose their favorite as some suggest then at least be statistically consistant with the findings of modern science. for every 97 minutes used to teach students about manmade climate change there should be just 3 minutes thrown away on denying it.

im not a scientist, but im smart enough to know that without superior evidence i'd have to have an agenda or be extremly stupid to deny what 97% of qualified properly educated experts agree on. frankly in my opinion, those who teach or advocating for the teaching of science denial in public schools should do some jail time for the damage they're doing to the future of human civilization (and the earth in general), but i'd settle for the revocation of their teaching licences. (i have no problem with private/religious schools or homeschools having the freedom to teach whatever fairytail nonsense they want.)

for the purpose of educating the many science deniers right here on ATS, here are few quotes from scientific societies, science academies, u.s. government agencies, intergovernmental bodies, who concur:

- Department of Defense
rising temperatures and more frequent destructive weather around the globe pose "immediate risks to national security." "climate change is a long term trend, but with wise planning and risk mitigation now, we can reduce adverse impacts down range." uncertanty "cannot be an excuse for delaying action." consequences of a changing climate could exacerbate "many challenges, including infectious disease and terrorism,"

- American Association For The Advancement Of Science
"the scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occuring now, and it is a threat to society."

- American Chemical Society
"comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem."

- American Geophysical Union
"Human induced climate change requires urgent action. humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. rapid societal responses can significantly lesson negative outcomes."

- American Medical Association
"our AMA... Supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropoegenic contributions are significant."

- American Meteorological Society
"It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide."

- American Physical Society
"the evidence is incontrovertible: if no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the earths physical and ecological systems, societal systems, security and human health are likely to occur. we must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now."

- The Geological Society Of American
"the geological society of america concurs wit the national academies of science, the national resurch council, and the intergovernmental panel on climate change that global climate has warmed and that uman activities account for most of the warming since the middle 1900's".

- U.S. National Academy Of Sciences
"the scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in te atmospere."

- U.S. Global Change Research Program
"the global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human induced increases in heat trapping gases. human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and arctic sea ice."

- Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change
"warming of the climate system is unoquivocal, and since the 1950's, many of the observed changes are unprecidented over decades to millennia. the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea levels have risen." also, "human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems."

below is a link to a list of nearly 200 organizations across the globe that agree that climate change has been caused by human action.

opr.ca.gov...

below is a link to where most of the quotes are compiled.

* climate.nasa.gov...


edit on 22-5-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2016 by LordSnow21 because: spelling

edit on 22-5-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: LordSnow21

Looks like a lot of people are on board with the money side.

None of those sources offer solutions for stopping the Sun, or stopping natural occurrences.

All of which is a million times stronger than Man.




posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

How much has the Sun changed in the last 100 years?
What natural occurrences account for the rise in temperatures?



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   
the only hot air is coming from whoever runs those schools. what a joke.



posted on May, 23 2016 @ 07:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Since there exists obvious contention and debate regarding Climate Change among the public...and the OP is talking of a PUBLIC school system...What is wrong with allowing BOTH sides of the argument to be presented to students EQUALLY within the textbooks...So that they may come to their own conclusions?

Doesn't this seem fair to all sides?


In a civics class, perhaps.

In a science class there is no debate, only method and conclusion.

Remember, the debate is mainly media led, with astroturf movements protecting some very wealthy interests.




top topics



 
27
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join