Connecticut to make Climate Change a Mandatory School Subject

Christine Palm, Connecticut State Representative

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Dr. Willie Soon – Connecticut state representative Christine Palm is alarmed that some children in her district choose to spend all their school time focussing on traditional studies like mathematics and science instead of spending some of their time learning about the “life and death” issue of Climate Change.

Teach kids about climate change? This state might require it


HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — A legislative proposal in Connecticut would mandate instruction on climate change in public schools statewide, beginning in elementary school.

Connecticut already has adopted science standards that call for teaching of climate change, but if the bill passes it is believed that it would be the country’s first to write such a requirement into law.

A lot of schools make the study of climate change an elective, and I don’t believe it should be an elective,” said state Rep. Christine Palm, a Democrat from Chester who proposed the bill. “I think it should be mandatory, and I think it should be early so there’s no excuse for kids to grow up ignorant of what’s at stake.”

Palm, who represents towns along the Connecticut River in southeast Connecticut, said climate change deserves a more prominent place in children’s education because of the urgency of the threat posed by global warming.

I’d love to see poetry be mandated. That’s never going to happen,” she said. “That’s not life or death.

Read more:

Christine didn’t go into detail about what job opportunities a qualification in climate studies would create, or whether a mandatory qualification in climate studies would help students win entry to the university of their choice.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 2:13 am

Child abuse.

Reply to  Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 4:15 am

One can call it many things but If you ever wondered:
1. if the old adage of give me a child until age 9 and I’ll show you the adult is true and
2. how Germany submitted in the 1930s
You now know the answer.
First the media and entertainment (aka “culture”), then the schools.
Imagine a generation (call them Gen Bots) joining up with the Millennials and Gen Z.

Reply to  cedarhill
January 18, 2019 8:54 am

Such a silly & uninformed cliche.

Germany “submitted” because of the need to throw off the shackles of the horrific Versailles Treaty cruelly imposed on it by Imperial Britain & Imperial France, and the usual sucker, the US.

I suggest that a better reference is communist USSR.

Reply to  Wally
January 18, 2019 9:00 am

There is little difference between the Nazis and the communists. Same totalitarian mindset.

Reply to  Joey
January 18, 2019 6:37 pm

The Nazis offered better outfits and a better economy, which is why the Germans picked them over the Communists. Which were the only two choices on offer because the Weimar government was weak, decadent and corrupt.

But, yeah, otherwise it was authoritarianism, central planning and mass murder, so the fundamentals weren’t much difference; both were far-left, which was why Commies and Nazis hated each other so much.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Wally
January 18, 2019 12:50 pm

And they decide the best way to “throw off the shackles of the horrific Versailles Treaty” was to kill all the Jews.

It is hard to be that ignorant, isn’t it?

Jim Whelan
Reply to  Wally
January 18, 2019 2:12 pm

“Germany ‘submitted’ because of …” You are talking about reasons. cedarhill is talking about methods.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Wally
January 20, 2019 6:31 pm

Would you like to list these actual shackles of the treaty and offer up your arguments as to why they were ‘cruel’.

It would be interesting to hear your views. Personally on first glance they do seem a tad Revisionist, but if you put forward a good argument I am always open to modifying my world view point.

Of course a counter view to all this is that if the Germans didn’t want Imperial Britain to cruelly impose things onto it then maybe they shouldn’t have violated the neutrality of Belgium in the first place, but I am sure you are in a position to discuss this issue.

Carbon Bigfoot
Reply to  Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 4:57 am

K-12 Public Schools are CESSPOOLS OF PROPAGANDA. Publicly funded UNIVERSITIES are worse.

Joe Crawford
Reply to  Carbon Bigfoot
January 18, 2019 6:58 am

+10 :<)

Reply to  Joe Crawford
January 18, 2019 8:51 am

CT state Rep Palm’s legislature email address is a public record item, so I sent her a set of polite, straightforward questions about the AGW skeptic side of the issue, starting out with what her official position was regarding assessments from skeptic climate scientists.

No reply yet.

Curious George
Reply to  Carbon Bigfoot
January 18, 2019 7:41 am

They will teach children to distrust anything related to climate change. Never underestimate a quality of public schools.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Curious George
January 18, 2019 12:58 pm

If you read this article:

“Why Are Young People Having So Little Sex?: Despite the easing of taboos and the rise of hookup apps, Americans are in the midst of a sex recession.” by Kate Julian December 2018

She wrote about internet porn and social media. May be the cause of the sex recession is public school sex education.

Reply to  Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 7:24 am

And they wonder why the rate of youth suicide and drug abuse is so high? Gee, let’s convince ’em by the age of 9 that they’ll have no future, they’re going to be present for the end-times of environmental collapse, food riots and breakdown of civilization, about which they can do nothing practical, and for extra points let’s confuse ’em about basic biology for good measure. Can’t imagine why they wind up FUBAR’d, can you?

Hopefully this bill will never be brought to the floor for lack of sponsors . . . but makes good clix in the meantime.

Reply to  Goldrider
January 18, 2019 7:44 am

Pile on top of that the cognitive dissonance experienced as none of the doom ever materializes. Then heap on the frustration at being misled and lied to for all those years…

Reply to  Rocketscientist
January 18, 2019 8:57 am

Now the communists must double down in an attempt to obscure their lies.

Reply to  Goldrider
January 18, 2019 8:09 am

And who doesn’t enjoy having your children report to their school teacher that “my mom uses plastic trash can liners” … and soon the swirling ocean plastic patch police show up on your doorstep

mark roy
Reply to  Goldrider
January 18, 2019 3:50 pm

Climate change is the platform the left is using for America to go go full communist
Control your energey usage, control your life

Reply to  Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 7:51 am

And people wonder why American students are getting close to dead last when it comes to their knowledge of science and math.

Bryan A
Reply to  MarkW
January 18, 2019 2:33 pm

AGW science is a Weapon of Maths Destruction

Reply to  Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 8:00 am


GP Hanner
Reply to  Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 8:18 am

“Education is a weapon whose effect depends on who holds it in his hands, and at whom it is aimed.”
— Joseph Stalin

Reply to  Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 9:40 am

Science abuse.

Reply to  Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 11:28 am

Yes, it is child abuse. Using children as political pawns is abusive but, then, isn’t that what “public education” has always been about? I do remember way back in 1960, a visit to my public school by Planned Parenthood. The pernicious, insidious leftists never rest. “Take me in oh tender woman, take me in.”

Reply to  Astro
January 18, 2019 6:41 pm

Kind of. Government schools were invented by the Prussians to turn kids into compliant drones for factory work or the military. But they at least produced drones who supported the society they grew up in. The left took over those schools in order to produce drones who want to destroy the society they grew up in.

But, yeah, the only way to fix the government school problem is to eliminate them. In the meantime, any sane parent should be homeschooling their kids, unless they spent all that time an effort having kids so they could be turned into Marxist drones.

Rhys Jaggar
January 18, 2019 2:27 am

Then they fix the curriculum rather than requiring open, skeptical enquiry.

Here is what should be in the curriculum:

i. Collection AND HOMOGENISATION of data, its effects on conclusions drawn.
ii. Geological data on temperature and seeohtwo OVER THE PAST 100 MILLION YEARS.
iii. Comparison of current temperatures with Minoan, Roman and Medieval Warm Periods.
iv. Study of weather cycles using Fourier Analysis of raw data to identify varying length of climate ‘beats’.
v. Study of Solar Cyles, CMEs and other energy phenomena and their effect on satellites, spacecraft and the earth’s upper atmosphere.
vi. Study of the Jet Stream and how solar events affect both it and global weather patterns.
vii. Study of the ENSO and MJO phenomena and their effects on weather around the world.
viii. Study of PDO, AMO, NAO, AO oscillations and how they affect climate on an interdecadal scale.
ix. Study of earth’s tilt and precession and its effects on intermillenial climate.
x. Study of the oceanic conveyor belts and how changes could affect e.g. Gulf Stream to NW Europe.
xi. Study of lunar cycles and effects on plant growth.
xii. Study of water management in e.g. California and how reservoirs and aquifers need to be used in combination to retain adequate water supplies.
xiii. Effect of deforestation on rainfall patterns, soil erosion, daily temperature extremes and biodiversity.
xiv. The effect of intensive monocrop agriculture on soil health.
xv. Case studies of restoring dead land to sustainable living ecosystems using water management, sequential planting cycles and appropriate management.
xvi. Asking whether cycles of greed and crisis management are superior to well managed sustainable systems.

That would be suitable, whilst being entirely unacceptable to right wing lunatics and left wing ecowarriors.

Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
January 18, 2019 4:51 am

I’m sure that’s what she has on mind.

old white guy
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
January 18, 2019 5:18 am

We humans can do nothing about the climate except adapt. Get over yourself.

John Adams
Reply to  old white guy
January 18, 2019 8:31 am


Ian Magness
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
January 18, 2019 5:43 am

That’s a very good list Rhys.
I’m sure we can all think of a few more with some thought – eg the composition of air and sea water, mammal populations, coral reef growth, glacier and ice field evolution, isostacy and eustacy etc etc.
The list is so long because the science involved is so very, very broad. Any attempt at teaching all this, however, would be a lot more beneficial to a school-age child than claiming it all boils down to the density in the atmosphere of a naturally occurring, generally beneficial trace gas.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Ian Magness
January 18, 2019 6:19 am

Ian Magness wrote:
“. . . the science involved is so very, very broad.”

That being said, climate scientists would benefit from more cross-topic education such as listed by Rhys Jaggar. The barrier to this is that if the science becomes off-message, most of the research funding drys up.

Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
January 18, 2019 7:56 am

Reminds me of my talks about the 5 spheres.

Until you understand not only the 5 spheres but also how they interact you will never fully understand climate.

Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
January 18, 2019 7:27 am

Your assumption seems to be that Climate Change will fall under the science curriculum. My assumption is that it will fall under the Social Studies curriculum. I like your assumption better.

Reply to  Hudis
January 18, 2019 12:04 pm

Too many science classes in elementary school are taught by teachers who got their certification in science by taking a low level “science” course such as ecology, sociology, environmental science, etc.

They then are given curriculum guidelines decided by a committee at the state level and handed to the district administration. The district administration then forms a committee of “teachers” to determine the student outcomes. And magically the proper curriculum already exists from some place 3000 miles away. It is hailed as exceptionally creative and highly recommended. It has all the necessary resources for the hardworking teacher who has very little time to prepare. It will have endorsements by ex-vice presidents, movie stars and the head of the sociology department at the local high school who got to go to the curriculum presentation in DC.

This same situation can occur at secondary.

If you are a individual who actually knows what science is actually about. And if you disagree with the railroading, you will be reminded that these are state standards you are questioning. That your not being a team player and that your evaluation will be based on said state standards. And there will be five of your colleagues who will see personal opportunities in agreeing with the ”party line”. Cushy assignments come their way. Every question you ask will be met with hostility. Your new science department head teaches fewer classes and gets to teach the new science class that is by law filled with students. The new science department head starts a two separate levels of Global Climate Change Science classes. Guess which which she/he teaches? The Global Climate Science Teacher gets state/local news coverage and the title of master teacher.

My own 12 yearold granddaughter schooled me in climate change. Her teacher is an expert.

Been there…seen that.

Retired chemistry and physics teacher.

Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
January 18, 2019 7:39 am

I asolutely agree with both Rhys and Mrs. Palm, climate change studies should be compulsory.
The real problem is who will make sure the pupils are given unbiased access to raw data and are taught both sides of the argument? I am confident that given the facts most average pupils will realise the truth regarding the “climate control knob”.

Reply to  Oldseadog
January 18, 2019 8:07 am

I merely hope that ‘science’ gets taught in our schools. I personally know some elementary grade teachers. They are good people, but while well meaning and well intentioned, they are woefully poor in teaching actual science and more importantly critical thinking. Their lack of understanding of fundamental principles in science doesn’t afford them the knowledge to say, “…hmm, that doesn’t seem right.”
On “Family Science Night” (like an open house school night) parents and family are invited to see what their children are being taught regarding science. I was a bit dismayed to see that most if not all of the demonstration ‘exhibits’ had been improperly set up and the teachers had no idea on how to correct them. These were not complex set-ups some were as simple as demonstrating convection flow in a heated fluid, and they didn’t even understand this principle.

Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
January 18, 2019 12:02 pm

Actually they should “teach the controversy,” providing information on both sides of the issue. And then encourage students to come to their own conclusions, to help them develop critical thinking skills.

I’m not holding my breath waiting for anyone like Ms. Palm to suggest that.

January 18, 2019 2:28 am

Virtue Signalling…

old white guy
Reply to  Aussiebear
January 18, 2019 5:16 am

Christine needs to get out and run around naked in Connecticut this weekend. It might alert her to the fact that climate change is not global warming.

Reply to  old white guy
January 18, 2019 7:25 am

Sunday it’s about to bounce from about 40 degrees F down to -4. There’s a little “climate change” for her–only we call it “weather!”

January 18, 2019 2:29 am

Indoctrination ?

“In the political context, indoctrination is often analyzed as a tool of class warfare, where institutions of the state are identified as “conspiring” to maintain the status quo. Specifically the public educational system, the police, and mental health establishment are a commonly cited modus operandi of public pacification. In the extreme, an entire state can be implicated. George Orwell’s book Nineteen Eighty-Four famously singled out explicit, state-mandated propaganda initiatives of totalitarian regimes. Opinions differ on whether other forms of government are less doctrinaire, or merely achieve the same ends through less obvious methods.”

Flight Level
January 18, 2019 2:29 am

Next: Creative evidence that the earth is flat, mandatory science-fair project.

I fought with the school of my kid. How come they insist on a subject, climate, while professors with 30+ years of tenure can’t get it figured ?

What are the chances that kids just about to learn the basics of maths could ever understand the issue ?

The question escalated quite high indeed. So far, kid does not report any climate nor global warming indoctrination.

January 18, 2019 2:30 am

The kids in school will just be on a climate change strike, so what is the point in having mandatory climate change courses.

Who gets to approve the curriculum and will there be an opportunity for smart kids to challenge the orthodoxy that will be channeled by the Teachers Union?

January 18, 2019 2:31 am

We all know this will be done around the agenda. Be assured that no alternative, scientific, data based views will be allowed.

Brain washing

January 18, 2019 2:42 am

The issue is who decides what is to be taught?

Genuine science based teaching would destroy the alarmists’ myths.

Unfortunately it is a safe bet that alarmist myths will be taught as the truth.

Tom Johnson
Reply to  BillP
January 18, 2019 4:55 am

Perhaps, even more important, is who will choose the teacher. Few elementary school teachers have the statistics, math, and physics education to objectively evaluate conflicting information on Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, particularly that which is fraudulently disguised as “Climate Change”. Most teachers the courses will simply be those who were also exposed to only the “Climate Change” propaganda, not the real science. (Apologies to those who object to the unnecessary modifier ‘real’.)

HD Hoese
Reply to  Tom Johnson
January 18, 2019 7:31 am

Sigma Xi is sending American Scientist subscriptions to schools in states with legislation on “vaccines, evolution and climate change.” I just had an interesting discussion with someone who suggested that not all teachers are competent enough to chose their own textbooks. Let the state do it. The states eligible are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Indiana, Idaho, Kentucky, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.

HD Hoese
Reply to  HD Hoese
January 18, 2019 8:14 am

I would add that Sigma Xi is having this in their next meeting. I wrote their communication manager that there is no such thing as “Communication Science,” only communication of or about science.
Sigma Xi Annual Meeting and Student Research Conference
Our Changing Global Environment
Scientists and Engineers Designing Solutions for the Future
November 14–17, 2019 Monona Terrace Convention Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
· Science Communication Track, including sessions on the science of science communication, engaging, and educating the public on environmental issues

Save us from those who would save us!

John Shade
January 18, 2019 2:51 am

I recently rediscovered this remark, posted on WUWT some three years ago:

‘My wife however has seen it all before. She grew up in the Soviet Union, and recoils from the hideous memory of endless political square-bashing on school playgrounds and carnivals, songs and long speeches glorifying the socialist revolution. The relentless aggression and mind-numbing tedium with which their teachers preached and prated a party line which they all grew up to discover was a complete falsehood. Now a similar disillusionment lies in wait for another generation of children.’

A parent referring to climate brainwashing in schools. Phil Salmon in Belgium:

Reply to  John Shade
January 18, 2019 4:19 am

Nail on head. Anyone familiar with life in the Warsaw Pact countries will recognize the relentless hectoring, bullying, and lying from the Climate Establishment.

Reply to  John Shade
January 18, 2019 4:56 am

Unfortunately, students today actually believe what their lefty teachers are preaching to them.

In the old USSR, they were living the truth.

4 Eyes
January 18, 2019 2:55 am

Is she qualified to say it is a life and death issue?

January 18, 2019 3:18 am

Move to a state that doesn’t believe this tripe

Reply to  Joe
January 18, 2019 7:28 am

People ARE moving out of these blue-bottle states as fast as the moving vans can haul them–CT, NY, MA and NJ among others! Trump capping the tax deduction for home mortgages at $10K was a masterstroke worthy of Machiavelli; the McMansion crowd now can’t bail fast enough.

Reply to  Goldrider
January 18, 2019 8:02 am

The problem is they are taking their left wing politics with them.
Reply to  Goldrider
January 18, 2019 8:04 am

Nope, the $10,000 limit is for state and local taxes (SALT).

January 18, 2019 3:19 am

guess less maths/science would enable the fallacies of CC to be “taught” without brighter kids being able to query things?
how do these fools manage to get into positions of power??

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  ozspeaksup
January 18, 2019 4:21 am

how do these fools manage to get into positions of power??

Now days, a College Degree in Political Science and/or Education (teaching) is the simplest and easiest to attain, therefore the not-so-bright, the lazy, the partiers, etc., opt for a Political Science or Teaching Degree and are hired by the Public School Systems or are elected to serve as politicians.

Joe Crawford
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
January 18, 2019 7:12 am

That’s not just “Now days…” When I was in school back in the early ’60s the department of education was already the school of last resort. If you were flunkin’ out or just too lazy you could always transfer over to an ‘Education’ major and float through. That’s not to say all teachers fit that mold. We are lucky there are still many that are competent and teach because they love it. Of course they are getting fewer and harder to find.

Reply to  ozspeaksup
January 18, 2019 6:21 am

You are assuming they are stupid. Since in many cases they have more money and a better job than people like me, I suspect they are smarter than me.
Assuming they are simply stupid is assuming the best case scenario.

David Dibbell
January 18, 2019 3:29 am

Teach the children to observe the weather and do some simple calculations about the movement of heat. The example I like to use is that a one-inch-per-hour rate of rainfall implies upward delivery of heat at 16,000 W/m^2. Watch a thunderstorm from a safe place and ask the students to find out how high it goes in the atmosphere. Do a search to discover what altitude is effectively the heat-radiating emission surface of the planet. Connect the dots and the future generation will be far better informed about how to assess claims of climate doom based on greenhouse gas emissions.

January 18, 2019 3:57 am

Most schools struggle to fit stuff in the curriculum and she wants them to make room to push this junk 🙂

January 18, 2019 4:02 am

Whatever happened to the holy and sacred Separation of Church and State doctrine that was brilliantly legislated in Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists?

Is this the establishment of a State religion?

Reply to  AWG
January 18, 2019 7:45 am

Those are my thoughts exactly.

January 18, 2019 4:13 am

January 18, 2019 4:14 am

Sue this grinning imbecile for “”Malfeasance in a Public Office”.

Nobody has the right to propagandize your children with warmist falsehoods.

old construction worker
January 18, 2019 4:16 am

I have great faith in our children. When they get older they learn their teacher have mislead them on many issues.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  old construction worker
January 18, 2019 4:26 am

YUP, ……. but too late they get smart, …… like when they are old construction workers or Walmart “greeters”,

Reply to  old construction worker
January 18, 2019 9:09 pm

But why didn’t their parents teach them that when they were young?

Gary Ashe
January 18, 2019 4:22 am

Well its the really really nice people like her that really care see.

Not like you climate heathens.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
January 18, 2019 4:31 am

Sounds like a job for the Department of Truth.

Jaap Titulaer
January 18, 2019 4:36 am

That’s not just unhinged, it is insane.

Perhaps one should go back to old Chinese system where all candidates at least have to pass some test.
Subject & contents does not matter, can by arbitrary & irrelevant like poetry, as long as one can prove that the brain functions above mere vegetative state.

Reply to  Jaap Titulaer
January 18, 2019 4:49 am

Jaap, you can’t insist on being able to think as a prerequisite for university. That will disadvantage some oppressed class of people. To get into university, you should ideally be non-male, non-white, non-ability-normative, non-specific gender and sexuality.

Insisting on standards is oppression. “OMG, we’re all dying because of oppression.”

Jaap Titulaer
Reply to  commieBob
January 18, 2019 5:22 am

Oh yeah, sorry.
I forget that being able to think is some X-privilege, I forgot which one X is, there are so many 🙂

Kevin B
January 18, 2019 4:43 am

Right, settle down children. Here is your lesson on Climate Change:

Climate changes. Always has. Always will.

Be prepared to adapt to climate change. Remember temperatures can go down as well as up.

The best preparation is wealth. The wealthier a society is, the easier it can adapt to change.

The biggest input to wealth creation, (apart from human ingenuity), is cheap, reliable energy.

Do not wreck your energy infrastructure in a vain attempt to control the climate.

That ends your lesson.

David Dibbell
Reply to  Kevin B
January 18, 2019 5:31 am

Good lesson plan!

January 18, 2019 5:12 am

I’d like to see a minimum IQ standard for public servants. Unlikely to get that either.

This one gives herself away as a mindless tool in two ways: climate dogmatism and not knowing that poetry is taught in schools. Guess the mandatory part may be her specialty.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  troe
January 18, 2019 11:06 am

An IQ standard?
Good grief.
Some very high IQ people are eco-loons.
Think of something else.

January 18, 2019 5:51 am

Following the pledge of allegiance to Al Gore in the morning there will be classes in AGW Proxy Data Manipulation, Climate Psychology, Bioengineering Fuels, Climate Theater I, and Creative Climate Writing II.

Remember to drink lots of Kool Aid at lunch and there will be a Globalist Parade after school.

January 18, 2019 5:54 am

used to be general earth sciences courses taught about how climate has always been changing.
course with the advent of man killing the world they need to find a way to plant the seed that mankind is responsible for every single issue on earth.

January 18, 2019 5:56 am

Can they start this a little earlier like as part of their pre-K funding push and delivery room instruction.

January 18, 2019 6:17 am

No mention of who will write the curriculum.
What will be the penalty if a teacher introduces additional readings not specified in the curriculum?
I would be fired for sure.
I would give my students in such a class a bunch of references they they should NOT read. Anybody caught reading them will have points deducted from their final exam. I would emphasize that there is no room for debate. Anybody questioning the curriculum will lose points from their final grade, and, hopefully, be excluded from student government and other extracurricular activities.

January 18, 2019 6:26 am

Teaching climate change (or even global warming) would be fine. What is not fine is that a topic so political would draw attention from Greenpeace and other organizations which run on the alarm money. So the teachers would be indoctrinated to tell stories. Gavin S telling doubling could mean +3K is not that bad; what is bad is telling the children there are evil people paid by oil companies trying to kill / drown / boil them. Think about the consequences. It is hate speech and a crime against the humanity.

Ed Zuiderwijk
January 18, 2019 6:29 am

Salem is only 120 miles away. Perhaps the study of witches should be put on the curriculum as well.

Björn Eriksson
January 18, 2019 6:40 am

It would be great if more people where educated. Climate education would boost awareness of the real science behind the propaganda. That would be awesome.

January 18, 2019 7:03 am

I teach AP Chemistry in a very good public school in CT. I already teach “Climate Change”. I teach the actual facts. I don’t think Ms. Palm would agree with my curriculum. I don’t care.

Reply to  Jake
January 18, 2019 7:21 am


January 18, 2019 7:04 am

As a retired Science teacher with three degrees in Science and who taught Middle school Science the students up to and though High School just need the basics of Science taught. If you want to use the topic of Climate change as a case study that is fine but the only thing you accomplish the force feeding of a point of view is a lot of people ignorant of Science.
My students at the 7th and 8th grade level were so unprepared for advanced multi discipline topics that I spent my time just getting them up to a level of understanding basic science principles like forces, density, temp vs heat, basic weather facts, chemical reactions, the periodic table, motion, time, etc.

January 18, 2019 7:06 am

A sanctimonious politician is more dangerous than imaginary catastrophic climate change.

Retired Science Guy
January 18, 2019 7:32 am

I taught high school science for decades, and during the 1990’s I taught fossil fuel usage/peak oil, increasing CO2, and a warming climate in the Chemistry in the Community issued based curriculum along with their predictions. Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth played in every classroom. As time went on, the CO2 alarmist predictions did not come true, and I noticed how the scientific method was not being followed when the temp data was changed. I taught my students that conflicting valid data should change the theory, but that did not happen with the CO2 global warming theory. Then 18 years of no global warming occurred with much higher CO2 levels, Al Gore makes a fool of himself with his predictions, Climategate gave insight on the dirty politics of global warming, Dr. Mann’s temperature hockey stick turned out to be a fraud based on cherry picking weak data, ice core data shows CO2 was not a major driver of temperature, then fracking released more oil and gas which allowed people to desire to drive more SUV’s in the US than ever before. Gasoline is now cheaper than what I paid for it when I was in high school (accounting for inflation). When I shared all of these changes with my students, I had to close my classroom door because I was teaching them both sides of the global warming issues not found in the classroom next door. I had to keep quiet during our science teacher meetings discussions on global warming because they had a certain agenda that only taught the Al Gore ideas. The bottom result was over 95% of my students agreed with me that the modern global warming is mainly caused by natural cycles and CO2 is only a minor factor in climate. I expected an angry parent phone call or a disgruntled school administrator discussion at any random school day, but it never materialized. I am now retired but feel good inside that I taught 1000’s my students the real issues of global warming and they now believe that the natural cycles have a larger influnce than CO2.

Reply to  Retired Science Guy
January 18, 2019 8:07 am


James Francisco
Reply to  Retired Science Guy
January 18, 2019 9:23 am

Wow. There is hope.

Reply to  Retired Science Guy
January 18, 2019 9:27 am

Good job, RSG. Let’s hope there are 1,000s more like you out there.

Doug F.
January 18, 2019 7:41 am

Until some wealthy billionaire buys out a major mainstream media network along with the Associated Press and starts refuting this nonsense along with other critical issues of our day, we are going to continue to see the propagandizing of our populace. As this example shows, it especially affects our children, since their parents, having been fed this stuff most of their adult lives, can’t or won’t give them critical thinking alternatives to consider.

My pessimism is based in part on my own family. I consider that I have three fairly normal and successful adult children and their spouses by today’s standards. Of the six, they are all college educated, and include teachers, a state disease specialist, a former lawyer and an engineering manager. Of the six, the only one I can get to intelligently discuss the global warming issue is the engineer! The others either refuse to discuss it with me, or just whiff me off as their lovable cantankerous old fogey “denier” father!

Their attitude is typical, I believe, across the spectrum of many of our adult voters today. The constant trumpeting of the “warming crisis” by the mass media and the “denier” label successfully applied to those who question it have permeated our culture. And while the trend is reversing somewhat as the dire climate predictions don’t materialize, the industrial and institutional changes put in place to “fix” global warming over the past 25 years or so aren’t going away until their consequences cause our system to crash either locally or nationally.

Sad, but true!

John Bell
Reply to  Doug F.
January 18, 2019 10:45 am

Remind them frequently that for them to believe in CC and then use fossil fuels every day is like being a member of PETA and then having dog fights.

James A Schrumpf
Reply to  Doug F.
January 18, 2019 3:30 pm

Same in my family. I’m the only one with a hard science STEM degree, Geology (no “Big Bang Theory ” jokes!), but I’m the anti-science one. I can quote statistics out the wazoo, but the Truth has been Pronounced by Scientists, so real data is to be ignored.

Ed Bo
January 18, 2019 7:49 am

Several years ago, my daughter, taking her first high school chemistry course, came to me one evening confused about the difference between polar covalent bonds and polar molecules. I explained the difference and then to confirm she understood, I quizzed her using atmospheric molecules: O2, N2, H2O, CO2, and CO. She got them all correct.

I considered then explaining to her why some were “greenhouse” gases and others were not. This would be the start of properly understanding this efffect. But I decided it was only the barest introduction to the topic, and she had her plate full with real course issues, so I let it go.

How many of these mandated courses explain this at all?

January 18, 2019 7:49 am

Are we getting dangerously close to talking about politics again? /sarc**2

Michael in Dublin
January 18, 2019 7:52 am

Only once children are given a good foundation in Mathematics and Science do they have the tools with which they can BEGIN to examine the complexity of climate. At this stage they can BEGIN to appreciate the challenge of the extraordinary Mathematician, George Polya, who wrote in 1944, “in theoretical matters, the best of ideas is hurt by uncritical acceptance and thrives on critical examination.”

Until Christine Palm BEGINS to understand Polya’s words she would be wise not to display her ignorance. This applies to many other voices who are so vocal about the “climate threats.”

Paula Cohen
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
January 18, 2019 1:37 pm

She has no idea who Polya was, and couldn’t care less even if she did. That’s old stuff…it no longer applies 75 years later.

Tom Abbott
January 18, 2019 7:53 am

I think they ought to write a law requiring the school children to read WUWT daily. Then they will get both sides of the story on not only the climate but numerous other subjects of interest.

Of course, some of you guys are going to have to clean up your language a little bit if they write such a law. You should probably do it anyway since I imagine there are a number of children who do read WUWT now. 🙂

Joel Snider
January 18, 2019 7:58 am

Here’s a wild speculation – ‘Climate Change’ education is not going to feature anything other than the alarmist view – NO SKEPTICS ALLOWED.

Taking bets?

Coach Springer
January 18, 2019 8:02 am

Objectivity and the scientific method are right there with freedom and diversity as things to be eliminated or at least interfered with by all progressive do-gooders.

Tom in Florida
January 18, 2019 8:09 am

Hey, this is Connecticut. Don’t waste your time or effort there. I left 28 years ago when Gov Lowell “one term” Wicker backed a state income tax which was backdated to the first of the year (1991). This is the state that complained when several large company headquarters recently left due to high taxes. They cried “where will the money we need come from if they leave.” Dumbass liberals.

January 18, 2019 8:10 am
January 18, 2019 8:18 am

In France it’s more likely a police officer will die from his own hands than from some criminal killing him.

More than 70 commited suicide last year. (more than one a week).
It has some relationship to the kind of lunatic green dogma being forced down the throats of the population, followed by repression of all forms of dissent, causing acute stress to these “public servants”.
We have it the wrong way round now.
Instead of them serving the public, the public has to serve them.

From my reading of the way teenagers behave today, the logical consquence of the kind of policies being put into place, will be a spike in anorexia, and an enormous increase in suicide rates.

I hope they realise adults teaching this new dogma of climate agony, “hopelessness” and “nihilism” will be held fully responsible for this next wave.

January 18, 2019 8:27 am

Put CT on suicide watch.

January 18, 2019 8:59 am

Goebbels would be SO proud! The Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda at the time attempted to control the minds of the young and thus, among other means, intruded Nazi beliefs into the school curriculum. A major part of biology became “race science,” and health education and physical training did not escape the racial stress. Geography became geopolitics, the study of the fatherland being fundamental.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Joey
January 18, 2019 9:04 am

Goebbels could never DREAM of what’s being done today.

Reasonable Skeptic
January 18, 2019 9:02 am

I think they should have a course in critical thinking skills first, then when they have the Climate Change course they can apply their enhanced critical thinking skills.

This would be a great life lesson and even alarmists will get on board this train.

AGW is not Science
January 18, 2019 10:16 am

“I’d love to see poetry be mandated. That’s never going to happen,” she said. “That’s not life or death.”

Neither is “climate change,” at least not in the way she means it.

I’d love to see it mandated that all Eco-Nazis be required to present PROOF through empirical observation of their “climate change” nee “global warming” claims, or, if unable to do so, to STFU about it until they CAN.

Which, given the fact that their claims are nothing more than “hypothetical bullshit,” should shut them up permanently.

Paula Cohen
Reply to  AGW is not Science
January 18, 2019 1:32 pm

You’re WAY too optimistic. NOTHING will shut them up permanently except having their jaws wired shut.

Robert Hatton
January 18, 2019 10:20 am

Modern Religions 101

January 18, 2019 10:49 am

ironically Chester doesn’t even have a school system. They are part of regional school district 4, but even then a small % of kids are actually from Chester Ct

Robert W Turner
January 18, 2019 10:50 am

Oh yeah let’s teach elementary school children climate “science” before they even have a real mathematics, physics, chemistry, or philosophy class. Brilliant. Why bother actually learning the mundane fundamentals of science when you can just skip straight to the specialized and highly complex subdiscipline. Why haven’t we done this for all subjects? Kindergarten students could be taught how to build and launch rockets, how to perform brain surgery, how to write artificial intelligence software, and by first grade could be successfully teleporting matter using quantum entanglement.

January 18, 2019 10:52 am

I suggest snow shoveling shop classes instead….starting this weekend.

Frank K.
Reply to  ResourceGuy
January 18, 2019 11:32 am

Here in New Hampshire, we’re predicted to get two feet of snow on Sunday with another shot of 6″ or so for good measure on Thursday next week. My fossil-fuel gulping snow blower will be getting a workout (along with me!) dealing with the aftermath..

Reply to  Frank K.
January 18, 2019 12:50 pm

I take it you have a good roof.

January 18, 2019 11:13 am

She seems very inadequately qualified judge the urgency of teaching climate change, with her BA in English.

Joe G
January 18, 2019 11:30 am

Indoctrinate them young and often

January 18, 2019 11:52 am

Don’t they build nuclear attack submarines in CT?

Paula Cohen
January 18, 2019 1:30 pm

“A lot of schools make the study of climate change an elective, and I don’t believe it should be an elective,” said state Rep. Christine Palm. “I think it should be mandatory, and I think it should be early, so there’s no excuse for kids to grow up ignorant of what’s at stake.”

Always assuming you believe that “climate change” is caused by humans, which is a stretch since the climate has been changing constantly since the earth was formed. What IS changing now is that humans — particularly on the Left — are growing more and more stupid. That’s the “life and death issue!”

Paula Cohen
January 18, 2019 1:33 pm

You’re WAY too optimistic. NOTHING will shut them up permanently except having their jaws wired shut.

January 18, 2019 2:10 pm

It is a good thing, the little rebels will search the internet for anything that proves their teachers wrong.

James A Schrumpf
January 18, 2019 3:21 pm

One of the favorite talking points of the alarmists lately is regarding wildfires, thanks to California’s recent bout. I found a website for the Interagency Fire Center, a .gov site that’s still up. According to their numbers, if I’m reading them right, the number of fires per year has been trending down since 1983, the first year the site claims has trustworthy numbers.

With hurricanes down, tornadoes down, fires down, temps up and down, sea level rise the same — what exactly is the climate change they’re talking about?

Reply to  James A Schrumpf
January 19, 2019 9:32 am

The exaggerated reporting of these events have been trending up since 1983 — that’s all.

Martin Howard Keith Brumby
January 18, 2019 3:47 pm

There used to be a song of some notoriety in the UK by a comedy group called Ivor Biggun & the Red Nosed Burglars. The refrain thanked “Mrs. Palm & her Five Lovely Daughters for being Oh! So kind”.
Surely not the same Democrat Rep?

January 18, 2019 4:27 pm

I can recall with great fondness a elderly science teacher in 1937 in England teaching us by repeating the original great experiements of the past 200 years.

The first was Galvani and his frogs hanging on iron hooks, which twitched as lighting flashes occurred in the distance. Then of Volta who reasoned that it had to be because metals in a flued, the frogs blood caused this reaction, and he then created the first battery which produced direct currant electricity. Then the science teacher in Denmark who using such a battery and a magnetic compass, showed that a flow of electricity produced magnetism which moved the compass needle.

And finally Michael Faraday who showed that magnetism both produced electricity and that electricity could also move a armature thus a electric motor. The whole of our modern civilisation is based on those experiements. .

That is what needs to be taught to todays studients, it should awake in them a love of science, instead of the Mumbo Jumbo rubbish taught today.


January 18, 2019 5:45 pm

I’m all for making this a mandatory course — there’s no better way to make kids hate a course than to have this religious proselytizing shoved down their throats!

January 18, 2019 6:01 pm

Teaching about climate. Great!
Start here:
All reporting agencies agree there has been little or no change in average global temperature since about 2002.
CO2 has increased since 2002 by 40% of the increase 1800 to 2002 so if CO2 has any effect on temperature at all, it can’t be very much.
comment image

January 19, 2019 3:16 am

If this law is as successful at stopping global warming as sex education was at stopping unwanted babies, we are all going to parish in an inferno.

Reply to  Jim
January 19, 2019 8:34 am

Perish ?? , sorry couldn’t resist

Snarling Dolphin
January 19, 2019 11:04 am

In Colorado many schools have adopted an Environmental Literacy curriculum. Connecticut’s approach would at least be more honest. Indoctrination by any other name…

Edward A. Katz
January 19, 2019 7:00 pm

The curriculum planners will make certain this course will have the proper Leftist slant-put your money on it!

Russ Wood
January 20, 2019 6:29 am

If intelligent parents can teach their children the FACTS, this is going to lead to cognitive dissonance for the child. SOMEONE is lying to me – but who? With everyone around him/her going with the MSM and the “97% consensus”, and parents saying otherwise – just who do they believe? And this is, obviously, not a good thing.

Gordon Dressler
January 20, 2019 6:15 pm

I wonder if the Connecticut legislature will precisely define what they mean by the term “climate change” before they demand that all children in the state study it in detail?

January 21, 2019 1:06 am

Problem is that weather and climate are now so complicated that most people just accept what the so called Experts tell them. don’t understand why Pres. Trump does not tell the EPA to go back to Court and prove that CO2 is a good gas, and is essential to all life on Earth.

Only then can we start to educated the population about the giant sized “House of cards” which has been built on the so called fact that CO2 is a pollutant as per the Obama run EPA.

Re the earlier mention about the British being harsh to the Germans after the end of WW1. My understanding of that time is that the British wanted to help Germany recover, but y the Fr ench who had suffered a part occupation for four years are full of hate, plus they still remembered being defeated in the Franco Prussian war of 1870..

But the real killer which brought Hitler to power was the crash on Wall Street. One wonders if we have yet to learn just how dangerous Wall Street really is ?


t, USA.

James Newman
January 21, 2019 3:49 pm

Strange thing is the leftist intelligentsia falls all over themselves heaping praise on these lefty states with their high minded ideals. Yet these same states lose population year after year as people vote with their feet and leave those same high minded ideals. Go figure. lol

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights