In Many Schools, 'Climate Change Is Playing Catch-Up'

WGBH - Boston Local NPR ^ | December 9, 2018 | By Samantha Fields

[Pining_4_TX]

Why is there still an NPR? .. or PBS?

[onedoug]

...and your sovereignty.

[abclily]

OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a giant nuclear furnace that controls the climates of all its planets.
3. The earth is one of the sun’s planets.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?

[oldtech]

Our kids need to learn how to outdo God on controlling the climate? Don’t know which is the dumber here....those trying to teach, those having this crap taught to them, or those who find it necessary to do any of this. The climate will be what it will be but those trying to say they can change it will make the rest of us poorer in the effort....and accomplish nothing more than that redistribution of wealth.

[oldtech]

Our kids need to learn how to outdo God on controlling the climate? Don’t know which is the dumber here....those trying to teach, those having this crap taught to them, or those who find it necessary to do any of this. The climate will be what it will be but those trying to say they can change it will make the rest of us poorer in the effort....and accomplish nothing more than that redistribution of wealth.

[William Tell]

"Those so called scientists still cannot answer what is the correct and ideal temperature that the earth should be at."

Interesting also is that I have never heard anybody state just exactly what the temperature of the Earth is.

I visited my doctor the other day and he used a thermometer to measure my temperature. It was 98.6 degrees.

We've been warned many times that the Earth may warm by 1.5 degrees. Or 3 degrees. Or many other such numbers.

I have never heard just exactly what the Earth's temperature is right now. How did I miss this?

[sergeantdave]

“They are no longer even hiding that they are indoctrinating our children.”

Ain’t that the truth. Too bad so-called conservatives can’t get off their useless, fat asses to attend schoolboard meetings and tell these leftists what is and what is not permissible to be taught in their public schools.

Commitment to their childrens’ education would require caring more about their children than making bucks.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Why is there still an NPR? .. or PBS?

There shouldn’t be an Associated Press, either - the very name cries, “conspiracy in restraint of trade in news.” People of the same trade seldom meet together . . . but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or some contrivance to raise prices - Adam Smith

The AP “wire” is a virtual meeting of all its members - and it’s been in continuous operation for over a century and a half. Don’t you think we should be a little suspicious?

What would “a conspiracy against the public” by journalists look like? Obviously, it would promote the interests of journalists. What do journalists want to do? Attract attention and influence people. How do journalists do it? By promoting bad news, and by having the image of being objective. How do journalists gain the image of being objective? By going along and getting along with each other, claiming that all journalists are objective - and by expelling with prejudice anyone who claims to be a journalist but who does not go along. But nothing like that is happening with journalists today . . .

</sarcasm>

Because Establishment journalism claims to be objective in full knowledge of the fact that they are negative - that “if it bleeds, it leads,” and “no news is good news” (because good news “isn’t news”) - journalism betrays its own cynicism (only a cynic could believe that “negativity is objectivity”). Establishment journalism needs to be brought to book. The wire services are engines of conspiracy against the public, and - given that their only virtue is economy of transmission of news, at at time when that costs bupkis - they aren’t “too big to fail,” but simply “too big.”

We the people have a right to ideologically competitive journalism which is free of governmental favoritism of any kind. And that means that talk radio, which is nothing more than meta journalism - journalism about journalism - must be on equal footing with any other journalism in every respect before the law. In reality, because of the propaganda advantage Establishment journalism has enjoyed, talk radio hosts have had no choice but to be, in classical terms, “philosophers." They cannot claim to superior objectivity or wisdom - that would be arrogance - they have to be candid about their political perspective. And, since Establishment journalism completely fills the niche for socialist propaganda, talk radio hosts have to be conservative (always understanding that “conservatism” is a poor description of advocacy of liberty and of progress of, by, and for the people).

We the people have a right to ideologically competitive journalism which is free of governmental favoritism of any kind. But in fact “campaign finance reform” exists at the behest of the journalism Establishment, and not of the people. The FEC shouldn’t exist at all. The FCC is heavily inclined to promote Establishment journalism by insinuation of governmental imprimatur. Some restraint on that must be imposed. And SCOTUS should put the kibosh on any thought of abolishing talk radio.

In a strict de jure sense, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan - which was a 9-0 SCOTUS decision in 1964 - was unexceptionable. It stood four-square for the freedom of the press. It makes it very difficult for Democrat or Republican politicians to sue for libel. The only problem is that Republicans are libeled at the drop of a hat, and Democrats are not libeled at all, ever. And whenever a Republican is libeled by one newspaper, the rest of Establishment journalism piles on. SCOTUS must be brought a case which raises antitrust issues against the AP in particular and wire services in general, which gives SCOTUS a chance to level that playing field. Lowering the standard of “actual malice,” at least incrementally, would be a big step in the right direction.

[trebb]

Yep - gonna do another series of brainwashing on the kids so they grow up pissed off and afraid that if we don’t give governments 100% control of all our lives we are doomed....