The 841-page National Climate Assessment released by the US government last week has been described as “sobering”, but Americans do not appear sobered.
Story submitted by Eric Worrall
The Financial Times, a major international business newspaper, the main competitor to the Wall Street Journal, has just published an article, highlighting the insignificance of the impact Obama’s National Climate Assessment has had, on American public opinion.
According to the FT,
“Americans have been receiving such warnings for a decade. None has managed to rouse the country from its seeming indifference.”
“… the authors seem to have forgotten that weather is not the same thing as the climate.”.
“Former US ambassador to China Jon Huntsman wrote recently of having watched a debate at which “all the Republican candidates chuckled at a question on climate change – as if they had been asked about their belief in the Tooth Fairy””
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/31320b68-d6ae-11e3-b251-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz31OwBG0TQ
(Note – you only get one viewing of this link, due to FT content policy. If you try to click this link a second time, the site will likely demand you buy a subscription)
The Wall street Journal summed it up this way:
Obama’s Climate Bomb
He’s flogging disaster scenarios to promote his political agenda.
Supervising the Earth’s climate—or at least believing humanity can achieve such miracles—may be the only political project grandiose enough for President Obama. So it shouldn’t surprise that after reforming health care and raising taxes, the White House is now getting the global-warming band back together, though it is still merely playing the old classics of unscientific panic.
On Wednesday the White House released the quadrennial National Climate Assessment, an 829-page report.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304885404579548453104239932
Great. Let’s all kvetch. Meanwhile, common core or not, the educational establishment, informed by ignorance, controlled by some level of government, encouraged by the MSM, continues to lie to and terrorize the young people they have mastery over.
Let us continue to bicker amongst ourselves…
It is difficult to trust lying, thieving, hypocritical nincompoops.
I see Pamela Gray has hijacked this thread to spread misinformation regarding the Common Core. Beyond my blog that has more than 2 years of extensive documentation on the Common Core and what the actual required implementation is, I have a book out Credentialed to Destroy: How and Why Education Became a Weapon available on Amazon that uses the actual mandated curriculum created pursuant to the CCSS. It points out that CCSSO is requiring climate change be taught pursuant to its definition of what the required Global Competency is. It cites what is required on Climate Change under so-called 21st century learning.
It also explains the admitted social, political, and economic transformation plans that the Common Core is a part of globally via the ATC21S initiative it is a part of. It also quotes the Secretary General of the OECD, Angel Gurria, that everything being pushed in education globally is to promote what the OECD in 2011 called Green Growth and now calls the Great Transition.
Honestly Pamela I know the Common Core like Anthony knows the arguments surrounding AGW. Less blog traffic, but at least as much if not more documentation.
I’m born in the the US in the ’60s. I consider myself libertarian and live by this tenet:
Never trust “The Man” period.
This entire CAGW “threat” is a pure government construct.
CAGW is a lie.
Agents of the US government will lie directly to their supposed constituents.
Their agenda is contrary to the benefit of The People.
From whom their power is given.
RobRoy:
For greater accuracy, I recommend that you change “CAGW is a lie” to “CAGW is an equivocation.”
Pamela is flat wrong about NGSS not being under the CCSSO umbrella in terms of how it operates. Not only do we have the common Gates funding, but the ELA concept of literacy is designed to be taught in the context of Social Studies, Science, and History classes. So the nonfiction offering is likely to be from areas that emphasize Climate Change or Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory that is specifically cited by the C3 Social Studies Framework that CCSSO sponsored all through its creation and quietly released Thanksgiving week 2012.
Because Common Core requires students to “cite evidence from the offered text” and does not allow explanations not in the materials students will have to ape whatever is provided even if it is propaganda. Thus CAGW and racism or maybe Barbara Ehrenreich’s Nickel and Dimed will be used as reading materials as well as the arguments that must be parroted back. The very phrases then get reenforced in the students’ mind whatever the actual facts.
Pamela Gray says:
May 11, 2014 at 10:58 am
“Samuel, again you are wrong. The Common Core State Standards do not have any such language in them. ”
—————
Pamela, in your response to my 1st post you jumped my arse about my reading comprehension even though I made no mention whatsoever about Common Core State Standards or any standards for that matter …… but was merrily stating a “fact of reality” about the liberal political agenda that now dictates the contents/context of the curriculum subject matter. Thus, me thinks you need “reading comprehension” training
===============
“Complain all you want about these other standards. There will be more none-CCSS sets to come I am sure. But the CCSS is a separate issue that returns rigor to public school instruction long missing in action and is not a part of these various other sets of content area standards.”
—————
Really now, …. returns the rigor to public school instruction? Says you, huh?
Who cares about “rigor”? The teachers will just demand more pay if they are mandated to be more rigorous. I want actual, factual science returned to public school instruction and all the politically correct “junk science” that is based solely in/on “consensus of opinions” and “flim-flam scams” eliminated.
But anyway, best you inform the NSTS about those “rigor” thingys because they haven’t got the “message” as of yet, to wit:
Pamela, the quoted text I posted concerning:
ESS3.D: Global Climate Change
Was copied directly from this web site, to wit:
National Science Teachers Association
1840 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington VA 22201
(T) 703.243.7100 (F 703.243.7177)
Copyright © 2014 NSTA
http://standards.nsta.org/DisplayStandard.aspx?view=topic&id=37
——————-
I imagine that your touted “Common Core State Standards” will surely prove to be about as effective at changing the “nature of education” in the US as “Head Start” and “No Child Left Behind” was.
What makes you think you can “snap your finger” and change the way science is taught in the public schools …… when you should know damn well that the majority of the current crop of Science Teachers are incapable of teaching it? Are you gonna give them all a 15 minute “crash course” via the Internet to explain what’s “fact” and what’s ”fiction?”
They are mostly adamant liberal believers in/of CAGW and you are not easily going to re-educate them.
Nuff said on this, Cheers
Pamela also forgot to disclose that CCSSO has created subsidiaries to impose without likely detection the aspects of the Common Core implementation that are likely to be controversial. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/mystical-marxism-shapers-of-our-current-world-system-or-building-new-mental-software/ explains just that.
Mtk, thanks for the laugh, both parties are drinking Gatorade from the same trough you are!
A parody? Lol, Mac, I have little doubt Romney would have us into a super costly WWII by now and do you not see the decline of the nation and the waste of its resources in futile wars and occupations? From since Reagan’s Star Wars 2.1 trillion money drain to the last two wars, 4-6 trillion money pit.
(“Russia is our biggest geopolitical foe”) Mitt Romney’s foreign policy team included Robert Kagan, a neocon who pushed for the Iraq war. His wife, Victoria Nunan, now Spokesperson for the United States Department of State was principal deputy national security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney.
Oops, WWIII instead of two… :-/
Robin, you are correct that CCSS will use nonfiction articles that promote AGW. My 7th grader just had to read an article for English class about AGW and answer the questions. And we are dumbing down our children. They also had to watch The Lorax and answer questions about that movie as if it was a documentary.
Terry Oldberg:
I would call “Climate Change” an equivocation but Anthropogenic CO2 induced global warming is a pure fabrication. It only exists in government sponsored computer models.
The “theory” is not “true” yet the government, in spite of empirical observation, insists it’s truth and it’s happening now.
I look at the RSS satellite record and I see that it is NOT happening.
to me, that’s a falsehood, that’s propaganda,
that’s a lie.
RobRoy:
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify. In an IPCC-style “evaluation,” model “projections” to past or future global temperatures are compared to a selected global temperature time series. As the numerical value of a temperature is a real number and as a real number has decimal places that are of infinite number, the probability of a match between the projected and the observed temperatures is nil. The IPCC does not interpret this lack of a match as falsification of the claims of the model or models, however. It interprets each projection as an equivocation which states that the temperature is “about” the stated value where “about” is a polysemic word meaning all of the possible values. As it is not falsifiable, CAGW does not match the description of a “lie” but it does match the description of an “equivocation.”
I have been commenting at the Guardian, it is surprising what is getting through there now.
A long way to go but you can smell the doubts creeping in.
Terry Oldberg says:
May 11, 2014 at 1:49 pm
RobRoy:
For greater accuracy, I recommend that you change “CAGW is a lie” to “CAGW is an equivocation.”
If all you have is a hammer…
Further to that:
Global Warming from CO2 is a theory, an hypothesis. (In my view It’s been falsified.)
“Climate Change” on the other hand has no hypothesis, therefore it can’t be falsified.
It’s known to cause unprecedented, extreme “warmcold droughtflood”.
A perfect tautology that’s always true.
Bruce Cobb says:
May 11, 2014 at 2:11 pm
Terry Oldberg says:
May 11, 2014 at 1:49 pm
RobRoy:
If all you have is a hammer…
Such a burden it must be.
That omniscience of yours.
Such a burden.
The whole report is nebulous threats and hollow scare mongering.
A still ambitious but hamstrung Obama and his merry Dems, societal engineers have hit the buffers and he’s going nowhere because all wheels have fallen away from his carriage.
It, Obama’s green charabanc, first failed with Waxman-Markey bill and consequent closure of the stillborn CCX*[1]. Obama, then went into full totalitarian mode and ordained that the EPA declare CO2 to be a poison and then went to war on the coal industry etc.
How deeply ironic is it, that in killing off the coal industry, that the shale gas/oil economic miracle not only bailed him out of the profligate insanity of zero rates and QE, it jolted the economy out of its torpor while having the unintended consequence – at the same time as decreasing carbon emissions.
This report is the last fling of the dice, Paris in 2015 is his goal and where Obama, the corporate world and EU hope to cobble some sort of world climate deal – events going downhill in the Ukraine may play some part though………………..
But without the Russian President Mr. Vladimir Putin, China, Japan, Canada, Australia, Brazil maybe – and the rest don’t count – it could be just the last few idiots, Obama and the EU signing up to industrial suicide via carbon emissions limitation.
Don’t panic, fortunately for those of you living in the States – unless America votes for another Clinton – it is unlikely that America will ever honour Obama’s [prospective] commitment to CO2 limitations.
*[1] Chicago Carbon Exchange.
@Pamela Gray says:
Actually I was quoting what my senior students have told me regarding the situation. Since most are from ranching/mining/conservative families and not at all stupid, they can tell when they are being fed a line of bull and being pressured to answer test questions in ways with which they do not agree. The local regular teachers, not substitutes, here have counselled them as to how to answer the test questions so as to not lose credit on the question regarding the cause for the warming of the planet. The test question is a result of the common core version being used here and ‘agriculture’ is one of the acceptable answers as to how man is warming the planet.
By the way, these kids were also smart enough to know that the “Supersize Me” hit piece on McDonalds which was shown in biology class was non-science and nonsense and could even tell me why and discuss it in terms of violations of scientific principles of sample size, control groups, etc. This, by the way was before the very recent study debunking the theory that eggs, butter, animal fat et al cause heart attacks.
Before you start name calling you should know more about the situation, red hair or not. There is much liberal pablum in the curriculum fed to our students and/or the test questions which result from common core, whether an issue is specifically stated as such in the common core items. The very existence of common core testing gives the authority to punish different opinions on global warming and other issues where the science is theoretical and not factual. There are right and wrong answers to most math, chemistry, physics, English and Spanish questions (at least at the high school level), but not so much for global warming, evolution or even history and other highly politicised types of issues. What is remarkable is how much of this is understood by many of our local high school seniors! You might take a lesson from them.
Robin – Pamela says AGW is not in CCSS. You say she is wrong, it is in CCSSO. Are CCSSO and CCSS the same thing? or is CCSSO a part of CCSS?
Shorter: “No-one Trusts Washington”
Corollary: “Anyone who trusts Washington is a[sic] ijit[sic], period[sic].”
Terry Oldberg.
Thanks.
Granted, projections can’t be “lies”.
So, as you say, I’m mistaken to characterize CAGW theory as a lie.
However; political declarations based on this theory are fraught with dire messages that have no basis in reality. Those are the lies.
richard says:
May 11, 2014 at 2:09 pm
I have been commenting at the Guardian, it is surprising what is getting through there now.
A long way to go but you can smell the doubts creeping in.
______________________
What, did “the Nucc” get canned?
841 pages? The modern day bureaucrats know how to baffle with BS. Via the UN and the EU Commission the bureaucrats know that writing a very large paper on something will more than likely get it passed because anyone who cares will be bored shitless by page 50 and give up.
It’s the unending lies that bother me. Nothing to do with science. Social “change”.
They have the mainstream press, schools, the power to grow congress…
While there are moments of hope, I’m then reminded of what we’re up against and the will begins to fade. *sigh*
Dorrough-
I would make an even bigger wager that you are very new to this issue or you are easily led around by the nose. I have followed this blog long enough to know many commenters have extensive knowledge about the science and equally important, they are conversant about the hundreds if not thousands of peer reviewed scientific papers on climate science.
If no one here is in need of smelling salts with the release of this report, it is because they have seen it all before. Are you actually going
to tell us there is something new in the document? Sorry, but the room is full people with lots of experience and expertise. Probably much more than yours.