Science Teachers’ Grasp of Climate Change Is Found Lacking

Krazy, I believe many comments in this thread highlight why it is difficult to discuss/teach the climate change issue.

Many people don't understand the science behind it. They don't look at numbers, statistics, opinions of those that are educated in the field that are qualified on the subject.

It's not a matter of science or data. It's about politics.

You can almost guarantee that a Right Winger or a Republican will deny climate change. Is that because they have insight in to the data? No. It's all political. They have to be against climate change because their propaganda tells them to.

One of the most illogical stances I can think of.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The evidence that human activity is a major cause of recent climate change is overwhelming, but 30 percent of the 1,500 teachers surveyed said they emphasized that recent global warming “is likely due to natural causes,” while 12 percent said they did not emphasize human causes.

42 %...hm...

It seems almost well balanced. I guess science is not settled after all...at least among teachers

But lest yee forget...teachers are uneducated as DJ says...about the subject they teach. So...it's cool.

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: DJW001

So listen to the people with science degrees.....just not the ones who don't say what we want them to say...got it.

No, listen to the ones who are not being paid to lie.

a reply to: introvert

I know, and it is highly upsetting since this problem is poised to be the number one driver of strife going forward into the 21st century.

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: PsychoEmperor

Thanks for the hyperbole and strawmans, but no one is saying that there aren't natural factors at work as well. And CERTAINLY no one is talking about banning any phrases.

Clearly if you believe humans are affecting the climate, you're a God-hating progressive science worshiper which means you're probably not a bigot and as we all know, if you're not a bigot, you're a politically correct, word-banning freedom hating Communist collectivist authoritarian who wants to give the country over to the Muslims, enact Sharia law, take the guns, kill whitey and force good Christian conservatives to bake gay cakes in hell with the abortionists and the sluts expecting birth control to be covered by health insurance.

The only question left is why are you trying to destroy America bro?

Let's leave Hillary out of this and focus on the problem at hand.

That before God tricked us with fake dinosaur bones, he made sure to add fake deposits of methane gas, etc to further mislead us. Why? God needs money and he thinks Global Warming will do the trick.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: DJW001

So listen to the people with science degrees.....just not the ones who don't say what we want them to say...got it.

No, listen to the ones who are not being paid to lie.

so how do we differentiate the two ?

how can an awerage joe on the street...know who to trust ? and dont tell me "by doing his own research".

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The evidence that human activity is a major cause of recent climate change is overwhelming, but 30 percent of the 1,500 teachers surveyed said they emphasized that recent global warming “is likely due to natural causes,” while 12 percent said they did not emphasize human causes.

42 %...hm...

It seems almost well balanced. I guess science is not settled after all...at least among teachers

But lest yee forget...teachers are uneducated as DJ says...about the subject they teach. So...it's cool.

High School teachers aren't drivers of scientific consensus.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

But lest yee forget...teachers are uneducated as DJ says...about the subject they teach. So...it's cool.

Climate change would be covered in a general science class in grade school. These classes are taught by people with a degree in education, not science. At the High School level, it would be covered in a class about Earth Science. Teachers in that field probably have their degree in geology, not meteorology or climatology. Incidentally, Geologists tend to be biased against the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis because Big Oil is a major employer of Geologists.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: DJW001

So listen to the people with science degrees.....just not the ones who don't say what we want them to say...got it.

No, listen to the ones who are not being paid to lie.

so how do we differentiate the two ?

how can an awerage joe on the street...know who to trust ? and dont tell me "by doing his own research".

It's actually pretty easy to tell the difference. You go to scientific papers and read them and don't rely on media reports.

a reply to: DJW001

Oh damn you got the list of all the paid shill teachers and scientists???? Can I see it?!

I've been wondering which scientists were real and which one were those nasty fakesters I keep hearing about.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The evidence that human activity is a major cause of recent climate change is overwhelming, but 30 percent of the 1,500 teachers surveyed said they emphasized that recent global warming “is likely due to natural causes,” while 12 percent said they did not emphasize human causes.

they sure arent...but wouldnt you say they should at least be more literate or educated on this stuff then the average human being ?

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Hell yea they should be educated on this material. That's why I wrote the OP, to complain that they aren't.

a reply to: DJW001

Incidentally, Geologists tend to be biased against the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis because Big Oil is a major employer of Geologists.

But how come ? These geologists are surely Science men ? are they not ?

are you telling me that these scientists can be bought to detriment of us all ?

So is this isolated strictly to geologists...or can any scientist be bought ? How about Climate scientists...can they be bought ?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Funny because it kinda seems like thats the point of your post. Teachers aren't teaching the view you believe they should and therefore are driving scientific consensus away from the direction you would prefer.

Maybe not scientific consensus per say but public perception for sure. And what good it telling people the sky is falling if no-one believes you?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

"Close to a third of the teachers also reported conveying messages that are contradictory, emphasizing the scientific consensus on human causation and the idea that many scientists believe the changes have natural causes."

This is Prof. Plutzer doing what he does. He goes around Universities as a POLITICAL SCIENTIST, usually with the 'not good enough' approach.
He did the same with students on Creationism and Evolutionism. This the master brainwasher at work.
He's not even a scientist, and the consensus he talks about re "climate change" is not his science...if anything, he just agrees with it !

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The evidence that human activity is a major cause of recent climate change is overwhelming, but 30 percent of the 1,500 teachers surveyed said they emphasized that recent global warming “is likely due to natural causes,” while 12 percent said they did not emphasize human causes.

they sure arent...but wouldnt you say they should at least be more literate or educated on this stuff then the average human being ?

Those that know do.
Those that don't know teach.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

This is why you look at the data presented and see if it is valid.

Show me a corruption trail for scientists promoting AGW. I can most DEFINITELY show you a corruption trail for scientists that deny it.

But like I said, the data doesn't lie. It isn't beholden to money or special interests. The data says that AGW is real. Just read through the links I provided in the OP.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Regardless to whether climate change is man made or not, why do so many need people to believe that it is caused by man?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Regardless to whether climate change is man made or not, why do so many need people to believe that it is caused by man?

So they get on board with doing something to slow it down or stop it instead of wasting time debating if it is real or not.

You go to scientific papers and read them and don't rely on media reports.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So, just to be on the safe side...if it's in a Science paper...then it's absolutelly positively true, right ?