Book burning: Scientific study can stand up to scrutiny

BurningBookThere is room for debate about global warming and its man-made cause, unless you are a student in Portland, Oregon public schools.

That was the directive from the Portland school board recently when it ordered any texts contravening that theory be purged from the district’s textbooks and other curriculum. Any insidious words like “may” or “might” or “could” that cast even a shred of doubt on the “settled science” of global warming will be stricken from student view.

And that’s a pity.

There is no question there is a strong consensus among climate scientists that the current global warming trend exists, is ongoing and is likely linked to human activity and the rise in carbon dioxide emissions. But there are also doubters who question whether the changes are outside normal climactic variations.

In the United States, the political and economic debate over global warming, what to do about it and how effective — and how damaging to our carbon-fueled economy — remedial measures would be continues to rage.

The Portland school board vote was one such skirmish. The effort there was led by environmental and left-wing groups that want to stamp out any dissent — as demonstrated by one of the leaders, Bill Bigelow, who acknowledged: “We don’t want kids in Portland learning material courtesy of the fossil fuel industry.”

And Portland is not alone in beating the drum to curb any dissent. Earlier this spring Attorney General Loretta Lynch said the Justice Department was looking at the possibility of pursuing civil action against climate change deniers and had referred a request to the FBI to determine whether the department could act. Nothing warming about that, global or otherwise.

Read rest…

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (7)

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    Apparently the [i]Baraboo News Republic[/i] is all-in with the MMGW “scientific consensus” notion but at least one writer there can see the danger of figuratively burning books to eliminate contrary opinion and data:

    [i]”That was the directive from the Portland school board recently when it ordered any texts contravening that theory be purged from the district’s textbooks and other curriculum. Any insidious words like “may” or “might” or “could” that cast even a shred of doubt on the “settled science” of global warming will be stricken from student view.

    And that’s a pity.”[/i]

    Perhaps by applying a little more thought and consideration the [i]News Republic[/i] would consider that if this issue is being driven by political zealots who will resort to [b]book burning[/b], their [u]scientific premise[/u] should also be scrutinized much more closely…

    Reply

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    Apparently the [i]Baraboo News Republic[/i] is all-in with the MMGW “scientific consensus” notion but at least one writer there can see the danger of figuratively burning books to eliminate contrary opinion and data:

    [i]”That was the directive from the Portland school board recently when it ordered any texts contravening that theory be purged from the district’s textbooks and other curriculum. Any insidious words like “may” or “might” or “could” that cast even a shred of doubt on the “settled science” of global warming will be stricken from student view.

    And that’s a pity.”[/i]

    Perhaps by applying a little more thought and consideration the [i]News Republic[/i] would consider that if this issue is being driven by political zealots who will resort to [b]book burning[/b], their [u]scientific premise[/u] should also be scrutinized much more closely…

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Me

    |

    It’s funny, pretty much every study done on AGW uses weasel words of “may” or “might” or “could” or “likely” or “probably” or “possibly” and some percentage after. 😆

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Me

    |

    It’s funny, pretty much every study done on AGW uses weasel words of “may” or “might” or “could” or “likely” or “probably” or “possibly” and some percentage after. 😆

    Reply

  • Avatar

    A.D. Everard

    |

    [quote name=”Me”]It’s funny, pretty much every study done on AGW uses weasel words of “may” or “might” or “could” or “likely” or “probably” or “possibly” and some percentage after. :lol:[/quote]

    LOL. Very good point! 😀

    I hope there is serious backlash. I can’t be the only one sick and tired of left-wing enviro-activists and their whining and moaning about everything under the sun. They demand things like a two-year old would, by throwing tantrums. When are adults going to stand up to these idiots? At the very least they should be made accountable. Can anyone say “jail-time”?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    What’s next Portland School Board ?
    Skill testing questions :
    Does Climate Change ?__ (Grade 3 required )
    If yes, What factors make climate change ?
    (clue … big round yellow thingy is one )
    How long has the earth been in this current warming cycle ? (Clue … longer than Al Gore’s movie )
    Did human cave dwellers cause the earth to warm or is it just since the scientifically proven global cooling scare of the 1970’s ?

    If the Portland School Board believes climate changes (apparently that may be in dispute for some ) then would the Portland School Board prefer ;
    Global Cooling __
    Global Warming __
    or The belief humans control the earths thermostat and will set it just so ? ___
    What percentage of the earths atmosphere is made up of CO@ from humans vs the amount generated from oceans ,trees … and other forms of nature ? ( A toughie question requiring thought )

    Assuming climate changes , is cooling better for plants ,forests and animals
    than warming ? If so how ?

    Is the following in keeping with your opinions .
    1. Climate changes ..always has always will .
    2. We are in a long term warming cycle and that based on historical evidence cooling cycles occur leaving large portions of the world under thousands of feet of ice .
    3. Warming is occurring and humans must have some impact despite natural variables ( Mother Nature ) running the show as has always occurred .
    $. We could spend $$trillions more trying to adjust the temperature by possibly a fraction of one degree … or we could build
    the equivalent of at least 20,000 new schools in the USA .

    Is the answer to burn everything that doesn’t conform with current day propaganda ? What ever happened to that “settled science” of the 1970’s global cooling scare ?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    The Portland School Board witch hunt wasn’t very specific about what naming the texts that “contravene” or might cast doubt on their religious belief that the earth has a fever and humans cause it . So what text books were they referring to exactly or did they make that up too ? Never good to show the kids what BS artists a School Board can be .
    Come on School Board if you are banning books let’s see the names otherwise it looks like you are trying to intimidate ,bully and silence peoples right to free speech . Not very becoming of a School Board especially with all it’s high brows that can read the Constitution .

    The “list ” please ?

    Reply

Leave a comment

No Trackbacks.