Posted on 06/07/2016 8:46:35 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
On the Portland School Board's decision to ax certain textbooks for their position on climate change, The Oregonian/OregonLive editorial board recently wrote, "The board's climate-change resolution is not intended to teach students to think critically, which is what schools should do. It's designed, instead, to produce acolytes."
The first responsibility of any school is to teach what is known. Man's influence on climate is by now well-established, as the board notes. Climate contrarians, despite all their bluster, have never put forth an alternate scientific explanation for modern warming that explains what we see.
If I were a Portland public school teacher, I would happily give my pupils a good, long hard look at the contrarian's positions on global warming — and show them exactly why they are full of holes, of tricks and poor science that don't agree with observations, and why man's emission of greenhouse gases are a far superior hypothesis to explain what's going on....
(Excerpt) Read more at oregonlive.com ...
“Shut up!”, he explained.
The only warmth you feel is from the cooking of the books.
How can you have a scientific explanation for fraud?
nah...no agenda in that nonsensical drivel, no agenda at all...
Ah Portland....where liberals move because Berkeley is too conservative.
The global warming crowd has never explained the 600 years or so from 800 to 1400 ad which prompted the vikings to stop raiding Europe, settle Iceland and Greenland and even plant vineyards in Newfoundland.
If the “climate models” being used to forecast warming 100 years from now were actually any good, they could be initialized to the conditions of 1916 and run to produce a 100-year forecast, and that “forecast” would match the historical record of the last century, and the warmists would be screaming it from the rooftops.
But they haven’t done that, because they can’t do that, because the “models” are crap.
So much bulls@@t, so few shovels. Not a single mention of sun activity or global warming on Mars that can’t possibly be caused by manmade activity. No mention that scientists should continuously question, question, question. The bottom line is that they should accept without question because there’s not enough background at their current education level to understand what’s really going on? This idiot should not be allowed anywhere near a student. “Don’t question us, just repeat what we tell you.” He can go to hell where he belongs.
It’s a scientific fact.
115% of scientist agree that 99% of climate change is due to 130% of people doing all of the damage. The only way we can fix it is to send Al Gore more money. If we don’t send him enough money by next week, we’re all going to die.
Global warming on mars can’t be from human activity?
We have landed like a dozen spaceships there, it is like totally our fault
There is no doubt whatsoever that 180 ppm of CO2 in the depths of the glacial period is too low (lowest in earth's history) and any CO2 we add is a benefit.
The author has a fundamental misunderstand of science. Without disagreement there’s no advancement.
While back we were stuck on a research project, so we organized a meeting with the other chemists in the company, two of whom had very different ideas on how this particular chemistry worked.
I presented my research in such a way that I knew one of them would disagree, and the other would defend me.
The argument lasted twenty minutes, and I got a bunch of new ideas to try.
If they don’t teach both sides, there’s going to be a lot of kids in Oregon who are very confused when their state isn’t under water in 30 years.
The only warmth you feel is from the cooking of the books.
The abililty to hold contradictory views is a prized attribute for leftists.
Sure there is.
Alexander Cockburn (since deceased), as hard a leftie as any, admitted it in Is Global Warming a Sin?
The Vostok ice cores show over the last 400,000 years that CO2 in the atmosphere is an effect of global warming, not a cause.
The cause of warming is that big ball of fire in the sky. When the earth warms, CO2 dissolved in the ocean escapes into the atmosphere, and when it cools CO2 in the atmosphere dissolves back into the oceans.
Never say it just twice,
You forgot the 3rd exclamation.
It needs to be a “Triune” clarion call.
Like a religious experience or altar call.
Sounds like the functional definition of propaganda.
:: never put forth an alternate scientific explanation for modern warming ::
The rules of rhetoric and debate do not require confirming a negative argument; there is no need to defend the negative, only the argument.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.