The National Center for Science Education says it has begun an effort to defend the teaching of man-made climate change in America's schools. Should any school district allow such blatant propaganda to be introduced into its curriculum -- without balancing it with the ample credible scientific evidence to the contrary -- those responsible should be fired.On the one hand, Scaife's braintrust is absolutely right. Anyone caught teaching blatant propaganda as science should be fired.
The main problem here is that the Trib, yet again, is on the wrong side of the science.
There's a good intro to this at Forbes.com:
The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) will begin offering support to public school teachers and schools on the contentious topic of climate change.So they're usually going after the anti-science creationists/intelligent designers and now they've shifted over to going after the anti-science climate deniers. Why? What do the two have in common?
Eugenie Scott, the executive director of the organization, based in Oakland, California, has been for years an outspoken defender of the teaching of evolution in U.S. classrooms. The NCSE provides resources to teachers, schools and school boards, and has challenged the efforts of creationists to undermine the teaching of evolution in various states.
As colleagues and textbook authors around the country began sharing their personal experiences and concerns about the teaching of climate science, Scott realized she needed to expand NCSE’s mandate to include the politically charged issue as well.
From the NCSE:
Although both evolution and climate change are accepted by the scientific community, both topics remain controversial among the public. As a result, teachers trying to teach evolution and/or climate change too often face opposition in their communities. Such opposition is based on ideology, not science, although the ideologies differ: religious ideologies in the case of evolution, economic and political ideologies in the case of climate change. In both cases, the result is that teachers are pressured to downplay these topics, misrepresent them as scientifically controversial, and air supposedly scientifically credible alternatives to them."Pressure" here might as well mean being fired (or threatened with termination) for teaching climate science.
The NCSE has some artwork to illustrate climate denial:
The Trib's take on the science fits very neatly into the NCSE's description of climate denial. The Doric: (undermine the science), the Ionic (claim the result is evil) and then today's Corinthian (demand equal time).
The Trib's threat today of firing any school teacher who doesn't give equal time to the anti-science in a science class should be chilling.
And STILL no mention at the Trib of NOAA's assessment that the Earth is warming. Using ten indicators each supported by multiple independently analyzed data sets NOAA says it's undeniable:
- Air Temperature Near Surface (Troposphere).
- Temperature Over Oceans.
- Sea Surface Temperatures.
- Sea Level.
- Ocean Heat Content.
- Temperature Over Land.
- Sea Ice.
- Snow Cover.
By all means let's fire any public school teacher that quotes from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration.