Comments on: California Schools May Require Global Warming to be Taught in Class

By: Congress Back in Session, Obama Public School-Congressional Address, and Sociocrat Greenie Resigns « Lighthouse Patriot Journal

Mon, 07 Sep 2009 20:09:14 +0000

[...] light of the teaching of unfounded theories, that have been proven to be false, like Global Warming – taught in school as if it were a legitimate science … The value of science to a republican [...]

By: jeremy

jeremy — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:21:41 +0000

not according to a lot of evidence showing that man causes less than 1% of the chemicals being put into our environment

By: Truth, Justice, and the American Way » Why not just put everyone in padded rooms?

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:59:42 +0000

[...] a state-approved parental program, since the State of California does not intent to accommodate any personal ideas in the field of parenthood [...]

By: mpinkeyes

mpinkeyes — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 02:47:41 +0000

Thanks for that Gary, you sure as hell explained it a hell of a lot better than I did!

By: Gary

Gary — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:23:17 +0000

SL,

As a former public school teacher, now a home school teacher and an author that really scrutinizes the curriculum offered, I have to say you are missing an important detail.

Whenever politicians or any political body gets involved in education and especially the topics of History, Social Studies and Science, the factual basis of the curriculum suffers. Real science curriculum has been bastardized long about because a select few used political means to promote non-scientific (i.e. unproven) ideology meant to control people. It comes to no surprise our standing in the world when it comes to teaching science is plummeting.

The standard political and normally Democrat move is to declare a set of opinions “science” then say someone is against “science” if they do not agree. All that has happened is the populace is lost on what real science is making them less informed and more easily lied to.

One of the methods used is the distortion of the scientific process by the use of semantics to which many have fallen prey too. In particular, Global Warming, as pushed by those with an agenda, is merely a hypothesis or a model. It lacks the rigorous and validated data arrived from tests by neutral sources to make it a theory. But then even MS Word flags the word hypothesis to ask if you wanted the word “theory.”

Any scientific hypothesis or model does not belong in the educational curriculum. Politicians should check out of the process.

Should children learn how to be more environmentally friendly, sure. But that isn’t what is being promoted. Junk science is.

The warming of the globe can only be done on the stellar level. Otherwise the localized environments contain and absorb any change. When you study the real science, what the politicians babble about makes them sound really stupid.

By: Deb

Deb — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 02:12:41 +0000

And since when are animals & plants more important than humans? Ever heard of the food chain?

By: mpinkeyes

mpinkeyes — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 01:22:44 +0000

SL, unfortunately I don’t have stocks in an energy company, so my opinion does come soley from the fact that my IQ falls below the recommended level. But that comment does prove a point that I have been making over and over again on this blog and that is the fact that you liberals think you are smarter than everyone else. So I thank you for proving this.
I am not against being environmentally friendly, what I am against is teaching our children that humans are causing global warming. Global warming is just a theory and not a proven fact. I believe that the earth heats and cools over time and nothing we do can change that. We do not cause it and can not change it. Scientists do not agree on this issue, when you hear that scientists have formed a consensus that just proves it is unsettled scientifically. When it is proven it will be fact, if it is consensus it is not fact.
Don’t you find it strange that the leading voices on global warming are politicians and not scientists? Don’t you also find it strange that every proposed cure for global warming includes some kind of tax? I may have a low IQ in your opinion because I don’t mindlessly follow what politicians tell me, but to blindly follow what you are told shows an even lower IQ in my mind.

By: SLCondensed

SLCondensed — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:08:39 +0000

Well since China just recently surpassed us in pollution output, it seems maybe we ARE awful people selfishly ruining the earth.

What is the deal with people on this website? Both you AND the author paints everyone as liberal douchebags with an agenda – you have no idea if children will be taught to be more environmentally friendly or if they’ll be taught the US is evil.

By: Deb

Deb — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:47:50 +0000

The sad thing is that they won’t be teaching kids to be more environmentally friendly, they will be teaching them that Americans are awful people who selfishly are ruining the earth.

By: SLCondensed

SLCondensed — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 02:31:25 +0000

Regardless of whether it is factual or not, it would be a sad day for everyone if we were to teach kids to be more environmentally friendly.

By your convoluted logic, I could claim that you don’t believe in climate change because you have stock in an energy company, and not solely because your IQ falls below its recommended level.