Posted on 03/15/2017 2:02:45 PM PDT by mdittmar
It’s in the graphs...
https://youtu.be/SU2tKKonXbA
Simple: start a religious private school so that you can teach your climate faith freely.
The left always tells us we have a rigid separation of church and state, so they must be held to their own standards.
I’m pretty sure this is ground based data that has been “adjusted”.
Nonsense….. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/14/how-imminent-is-the-rss-pause-now-includes-january-and-february-data/
Now that man burns fossil fuels, we should expect Earth to hold a 59° global mean temperature into perpetuity, and any deviation from that is necessarily traced back to our tailpipes.
Woo woo woo woo Woo woo woo woo Woo woo woo woo Woo woo woo woo!
This was in a school textbook? Good grief.
I saw a video a while back with Al Gore trying to pull a similar stunt, using a large glass jug.
The Earth doesn't have a plastic or glass cover around it to trap heat. Greenhouses have a plastic or glass cover to trap heat. Clouds don't trap heat. Gases don't trap heat. There is no such thing as a "Greenhouse Gas".
Did you write a pleasant letter to both your child's school and the textbook publisher?
Here are some more facts. The "record" temperatures claimed in these years differ by temeratures well within the margin of error. We don't have the precision to determine which was warmest. Also, 2014-2016 was an El Nino event, which are known to warm the planet. Now that it is over, the temperature is falling.
LOL
Unh hunh...
How do they keep the little brats from Googling stuff?
Mary Ellen Flannery is scientifically illiterate. She is nothing more than a propagandist.
Is Mary Ellen Flannery also incompetent as a teacher? It’s truly frightening to think that Mary Ellen Flannery could be poisoning the minds of kids by indoctrinating them with falsehoods.
No wonder she writes articles for the National Education Association’s web site.
Clouds do trap heat - a clear winter night is going to get 10 to 20 degrees colder where I live than a cloudy one.
But they don’t trap heat the way a plastic bag does.
I teach about climate change in my college physics class. Here’s what I do:
I first have an epistemology / philosophy of science discussion. In that, I derive the fundamental principles of demarcation (of science) from logic. This is where the principle of falsification comes from, and also that induction is not a valid basis for conclusions. Additionally, I argue that all conclusions must follow the rational rules of logic and premises, methods and data must be clearly stated or available so that the results can be verified or repeated by others. I maintain that, without any one of these features, it is not science. That’s my starting point. This way, we have a common set of rules with which to judge any proposition.
Next, I present a list of common logical fallacies. For example: converse error, inverse error, confirmation bias, appeal to authority, appeal to ignorance, circular reasoning, alteration of data, censorship, ad-hominems, intimidation and even death threats. I define each of these fallacies and present an example for each from global warming advocates.
Perhaps the most important results from the logical fallacies discussion is that evidence of warming is not evidence of human-caused warming and that consensus is irrelevant.
Anyway, after dismissing many arguments on the basis of logical fallacies we are left with, “Ok. What are some of the ‘valid’ arguments for global warming?” - and there are some.
We consider the example that, if greenhouse gases are responsible for the warming, greenhouse gas theory predicts that the temperature trend in the tropical troposphere must be increasing at at rate about 3 to 4 times the rate at the surface. But 70 years of balloon and satellite data show that the atmospheric trend is 2 to 3 times *slower* that the surface rate. The exact opposite of what greenhouse gas theory demands.
Next, we consider another greenhouse gas prediction. As the ocean temperature increases, it releases more water vapor. Since water vapor is a more potent greenhouse gas, the so-called insulating layer becomes stronger and less heat energy will be radiated into space. But we have about 50 years of satellite data for this, and the data shows that heat energy radiating into space *increases* at a rate about three times greater than greenhouse gas theory predicts it should be *decreasing*.
With these simple, logical arguments, we prove beyond a doubt, that either greenhouse gases are NOT the primary or even significant contributors to any observed warming or that our greenhouse gas theory is simply wrong.
Surprisingly, my students have always reacted very positively to my argument. Some have even used it to challenge their teachers in other classes.
Not that it matters to FReepers that STILL send their kids to public schools, but note that this is being published by THE NEA, meaning the ‘teachers’ of YOUR CHILDREN.
The NEA is a union...if they want to argue for better working conditions and better pay (with a straight face), that’s one thing. But I guess they feel indoctrinating YOUR CHILDREN is a higher priority.
Kids. The weather changes. All over the world there is all sorts of weather. It changes over time. By far the greatest cause is difference is the rays we get from the sun. Isn’t it exciting?
Funny. The kids I teach in Sunday School all know it’s a hoax.
Another reason to homeschool...
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.