5 thoughts on “Portland school board bans climate change-denying materials”

  1. Excellent response from PowerLine Blog:

    Posted on May 21, 2016 by Steven Hayward in Climate, Green Weenie Award
    Green Weenie of the Week: The Portland School Board

    The school board of Portland, Oregon, has passed a resolution banning any books that express any skepticism about climate change alarmism:

    The Portland Public Schools board unanimously approved a resolution this week that bans textbooks and other teaching materials that deny climate change exists or cast doubt on whether humans are to blame.

    It is unacceptable that we have textbooks in our schools that spread doubt about the human causes and urgency of the crisis,” Lincoln High School student Gaby Lemieux said during board testimony Tuesday. “Climate education is not a niche or a specialization, it is the minimum requirement for my generation to be successful in our changing world.”

    Bill Bigelow, editor of the ReThinking Schools online magazine and co-author of a textbook on environmental education, worked with several environmental groups to present the resolution, the Tribune reported.

    “A lot of the text materials are kind of thick with the language of doubt, and obviously the science says otherwise,” Mr. Bigelow said. “We don’t want kids in Portland learning material courtesy of the fossil fuel industry.”

    He took particular issue with teaching materials that used iffy language when discussing climate change, like “might,” “may” and “could.”

    I’ve highlighted this last sentence because it means that Portland schools cannot use the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports on climate science, because those reports use the words “might,” “may,” and “could” throughout, along with the term “uncertain” or “uncertainty” (both of which appear hundreds of times in the IPCC reports on climate science).

    This, for example, from the summary of the 2013 IPCC climate science report:

    The size of this warming is broadly consistent with predictions of climate models, but it is also of the same magnitude as natural climate variability. Thus the observed increase could be largely due to this natural variability; alternatively this variability and other human factors could have offset a still larger human-induced greenhouse warming. The unequivocal detection of the enhanced greenhouse effect from observations is not likely for a decade or more. (Emphasis added.)

    Oh dear. There’s those prohibited words, right there in the “consensus science” document. Better not let Portland school kids see this. They might become “confused.” Heh. Who’s anti-science now?

    P.S. It may not matter much, since Portland is rapidly becoming a city without children. (This is one reason I don’t worry about the Left in the long run: they aren’t procreating. Thank goodness.)

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/05/green-weenie-of-the-week-the-portland-school-board.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+powerlineblog%2Flivefeed+%28Power+Line%29

  2. Thanks, Doug, for explaining how “consensus science” is always politically correct but only rarely scientifically correct.

    E.g., after proclaiming that CO2 will decide the survival of humans, a new discovery explains why the modern form of humans has existed for ~200,000 years, but the “scientific revolution” only started ~500 years ago in 1543:

    Each evolutionary stage of human civilization is reset by another super-solar flare every ~1,000 years!

    http://sciencenordic.com/sun-can-emit-superflares-every-1000-years

  3. Well, the so-called ‘science’ is far from settled and new findings will show its error.
    In the meantime, the Nazi ‘do-gooders’ are trying to stifle those new findings before they debunk this ‘Global Warming’ myth.
    Gandhi said it, “Just because a lot of people believe it does not make it so!”
    And a majority of people and scientists do not believe the Alarmist junk.
    How much damage are we going to do to our economy and society before the truth is recognized?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.