Are public schools meant to educate or indoctrinate? Depends. Ask the left and you will quickly find out that paramount in getting a proper education includes the correct political beliefs– including environmental activism.
In Montpelier earlier this year, Bill Burrell’s sixth-grade students testified before legislative committees about global warming and what Vermont can do about it. The students also are immersed in conservation and alternative energy projects.
In South Burlington recently, a middle school math teacher used a portion of Al Gore’s documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth,†to illustrate linear equations. An English teacher used the movie to spark opinion writing. Another documentary, “Too Hot Not To Handle,†was shown in a science class during a climate and weather unit to help illustrate the effect that human beings have on the environment, according to Frederick Tuttle Middle School Principal Joe O’Brien. ~burlingtonfreepress.com
As a product, and former political prisoner/dissident, of the public school system I can tell you that far from being a neutral arbiter public schools are in fact mostly public indoctrination centers and were meant to be so from the very beginning.
The situation with schools teaching global warming is a case in point. A case that is run amuck. An entire generation of children are being taught propaganda about the environment and global warming. The problem with this is that, as with any other propaganda campaign, disinformation destroys those who consume it as well as the organization which engages in it. Those who grow up believing these lies will bring about ‘solutions’ which could not only destroy in some way our civilization, but the environment as well, The integrity of the public school system will also be irepareably harmed once it is clear that the lies taught today are known to be a lot of hot air tommorrow.
WASHINGTON – When climate scientist Andrew Weaver considers the idea of tinkering with Earth’s air, water or sunlight to fight global warming, he remembers the lessons of a favorite children’s book.
In the book, a cheese-loving king’s castle is infested with mice. So the king brings in cats to get rid of the mice. Then the castle’s overrun with cats, so he brings in dogs to get rid of them, then lions to get rid of the dogs, elephants to get rid of the lions, and finally, mice to get rid of the elephants.
That scenario in “The King, the Mice and the Cheese,” by Nancy and Eric Gurney, should give scientists pause before taking extreme measures to mess with Mother Nature, says Weaver of the University of Victoria.
However, in recent months, several scientists are considering doing just that. ~news.yahoo.com
What it all adds up to is a campaign to, “just do something,” when it isn’t even clear that something needs to be done. It’s a situation which invites disaster as those who demand, in ever louder and desparate terms, that we, “try something,” in a tone of panic.
The formula is simple. The earth is about to be made uninhabitable so let’s try anything no matter how stupid or foolish.
But at Trenberth’s same Boulder, Colo., research center, climate scientist Tom Wigley is exploring that mock volcano idea.
“It’s the lesser of two evils here (the other being doing nothing),” Wigley said. “Whatever we do, there are bad consequences, but you have to judge the relative badness of all the consequences.”
Studying the concept of how volcanic pollutants could lessen global warming — the Earth was slightly cooler after the eruption of a Philippine volcano 16 years ago — was brought to the forefront of scientific debate last summer by Nobel Laureate Paul Crutzen.
“It was meant to startle the policymakers,” said Crutzen, of Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Chemistry. “If they don’t take action much more strongly than they have in the past, then in the end, we have to do experiments like this.”
In the past, scientists and others have avoided talking publicly about these ideas, known as “geoengineering,” even though the concept was first raised in 1965. They worried that the hope of a quick technological fix to global warming would prevent politicians and the public from making the real energy sacrifices that they say are necessary to slow climate change. ~news.yahoo.com