Jump to content

Click Here To Visit Our Sponsor


Classrooms Become Next Battleground for Climate Change Skeptics

  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 ohreally?



  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 161 posts

Posted 17 February 2012 - 03:04 PM

It's a shame politics plays a major role instead of facts.

Stephanie Pappas, LiveScience Senior Writer

For years, science classrooms have been a battleground for supporters of teaching evolution versus creationism or intelligent design. Now, teachers may be once again caught in the crossfire as a new controversial topic makes its way into education: climate change.

Recently leaked documents http://www.livescien...ate-change.html from conservative think tank The Heartland Institute reveal plans to pay a non-climate scientist to create school curricula designed to foster doubt about the scientific evidence surrounding climate change. Meanwhile, surveys suggest that science teachers face criticism over teaching about global warming, and some states have passed legislation seeking to include anti-climate change material in the scientific curriculum. hough climate change is politically inflammatory, climate scientists are nearly unanimous that the Earth is warming and that human-created greenhouse gases are to blame. This conclusion comes from multiple lines of evidence,

#2 canuck


    Senior Villager

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 395 posts

Posted 20 February 2012 - 08:54 PM

Yes, that is the whole point of the series of posts relating to “The Great Global Warming Scam”.

For those of us who are scientists and are exposed to the realities of the science industry on a daily basis, the politicisation and corruption of science is old news.

Similarly, we are well aware of the fact that scientists are no different from regular people in that they are not immune from distortion, misrepresentation and outright fraud in the pursuit of their personal agendas.

Until recently, the general public has been blissfully unaware of these realities. Consequently, they have held science in a position of high esteem; and, in general, paid deference to the pronouncements of scientists.

However, this has all changed as a direct result of “The Great Global Warming Scam”.
The general public has become aware of the scam; and the esteem of both science and scientists has fallen to that of lawyers and used car salesmen.

The general public now views the pronouncements of “science” with a healthy degree of scepticism and cynicism, and is less inclined to be bamboozled by much of the self serving BS that is excreted by the science industry.

In the long term, as scientists are more held accountable for their actions, this can only benefit both science and the general advance of knowledge.

#3 canuck


    Senior Villager

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 395 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 09:24 PM

The posting in the OP above has been shown to be fraudulent and a deliberate smear on “The Heartland Institute” perpetrated by Dr. Peter Gleick of the AGU.

It has been shown that he was pursuing an agenda aimed at stifling the debate surrounding “The Great Global Warming Scam”; seems he made the mistake of getting caught.

It is significant to note that Dr.Gleick was Chairman of the AGU’s Task Force on Scientific Ethics.

Tells you all you need to know about integrity and ethics in science.

The following is the press release from the AGU:

Scholarly Society Rejects Deception Regarding Heartland Institute Documents
February 21, 2012
AGU Release No. 12-11
For Immediate Release

In response to a blog post late yesterday, 20 February 2012, by Dr. Peter Gleick regarding documents purportedly from the Heartland Institute which he disseminated, AGU President Michael McPhaden issued the following statement:

“AGU is disappointed that Dr. Gleick acted in a way that is inconsistent with our organization’s values. AGU expects its members to adhere to the highest standards of scientific integrity in their research and in their interactions with colleagues and the public. Among the core values articulated in AGU’s Strategic Plan are ‘excellence and integrity in everything we do.’ The vast majority of scientists share and live by these values.

“AGU will continue to uphold these values and encourage scientists to embrace them in order to remain deserving of the public trust. While this incident is regrettable, it should not obscure the fact that climate change is occurring or interfere with substantive scientific discourse regarding climate change.”

On Thursday, 16 February, prior to his blog post, Dr. Gleick resigned as chair of AGU’s Task Force on Scientific Ethics, which first convened in November 2011. In his resignation, he cited “personal, private reasons” and expressed concern that he would not be able to fulfill his responsibilities as chair. His resignation was accepted.

Following Dr. Gleick’s resignation, a search began immediately for a replacement. Effective today, 21 February, the new chair of AGU’s Task Force on Scientific Integrity is Linda Gundersen, Director, Office of Science Quality and Integrity, USGS (U.S. Geological Survey).

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users