Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

<font color="plum">Then you have to decide what constitutes "indoctrination". Hearing different ideas is not the same as indoctrination. It also depends on how the messages are taught.

Take care of the planet? Yes.
Mankind is responsible for the global warming epidemic? No. (an objective investigation of the data does not support this claim).
Discussing politics in American gov't? Absolutely.
Teaching which political POV is the "best"? No.
Teaching evolution as the beginning of life? Nope. Evidence is not conclusive.
Teaching evolution as one possibility for the beginning of life? Sure. But other possibilities should at least be mentioned as well, specifically the Creation theory common in several religions.</font>

Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

Other.

I think it's a good idea to recycle all the waste that we can. I also think it's a good idea to take care of how we treat the planet. However, I also believe that if you're going to teach a "story" to our children, you teach both sides, or all sides. If you're going to talk about Global Warming, aka Global Climate Change, then both sides need to be presented. It becomes pure indoctrination when you say "Man is the only reason the climate is changing, and here's the proof", ignoring anything that doesn't fit into the neat little package that is presented. By all means teach our children to care for the planet, but don't feed them a line of crap about how it's only this way because (insert something here).

Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

I have no problems with promoting green and healthy lifestyles (food)are very important and I try to do both. My problem is the capitalist pigs (not all capitalist are bad just the ones) who try to charge us extra for making green and healthy choices. Anything with whole wheat cost an arm and a leg more than its less healthy counterpart? white rice vs. brown what cost more? Anything with an energy efficient label usually cost more. Although I noticed that appliances are starting to come closer in line, and in some places if an appliance doesn't have an energy efficiency label they don't even sell them. In those places you find a sharp drop. So why are we as a society not demanding for green and healthy and why are the corporations not promoting these lifestyles and making them the easy choice for everyone as most are just going to chose the cheeper option and some have no choice if they are on a limited budget? This just seems backwards to me as the cost of production is no different or minimal at best and logical if you factor in future dollars saved by society including health care dollars.

Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

Being "Older" ...MUCH older than many who may read these forums, I lived through the 1970's which were basically a mirror to what you are seeing today. We were taught and had it drilled into us by Well meaning but misguided people who were convinced that:
1. A global Ice Age was imminent (and it was being caused by man)
2. All the Oil in the world would be used up by 1999
3. The entire Amazon junge would be gone by 1990
4. We would be starving because we could not feed all the people by 1999
5. Florida and most major coastal areas would be under water due to rising oceans from all the new formed ice at the poles by 1999

Watch the movie "Soylent Green" some time....it will give you a view of what we were being told WOULD happen.

Now Im older (47) and I attend College part time working for additional degrees and I see the same sorts of over hype and alarmism based on just as much of junk science as some of those same people were using in the 1970's. The current "Global Climate Issue" (thats the current code for what used to be Global warming but which had to be abandoned in the face of the evidence) is basically nothing more than a money scam. It is a way for a few people to become hyper wealthy at the expense of many wrapped in a warm and fuzzy sounding wrapper.

I find it curious that the people who share my views on the climate are actually Meteorologists who teach the classes at the community colleges and State Colleges where I attend night classes. I have had a chance to meet several of them and many work for organizations like NOA, NASA, and NaRL here in the DC area. It is usually a pony-tailed hippy wannabe with a non-science degree that is pushing the "Global Climate" issue.

I am all for having clean efficient technology but see no reason whatsoever to abandon a Capitalistic Market force driven economy to do so. Efficient = lower cost in the long run = higher profits, but by forcing companies to meet impossible technical challenges on an unsupportable artificial time scale is just stupid....


there I said my :twocents:

Properly taught science is a god thing, promoting junk science which all to often is what happens in our schools
is just bad. So I voted yes. I just want them to focus on teaching the old basics, reading, writing and Arithmatice, add in un-adulterated History, Geography, and science

Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

Personally, I'm just a visitor here. This is The Creators planet and frankly, if someone were visiting, or staying at mt place, I wouldn't want them to mess it all up.

I see my neighbours put the garbage out and there are no blue recycle bags. It's really not hard to put something in a blue bag, instead of a black one.

I find that when the garbage is picked up every other week (recycle is weekly) I only have about 2-3 of the small white kitchen garbage bags to throw away. All the rest is recycle stuff.

Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

The reason for teaching evolution in school, as I understand it, is that it is because it is a huge part in the foundation of biology (along with cell theory). It isn't because there is some huge movement to dethrone the belief in god. Evolution is taught in schools because it is a cornerstone of biology. And we teach biology in schools because it helps us better understand this world. So many "advancements" today come from this field; medicines, better crop yields, vaccines, etc. Biology is a fundemental science and Darwin's work played a huge role in accelerating it. That is why it is taught. To be quite frank, when creation theory is up to parity in terms of tangible benefits and understanding the world around us, then I'll accept it being taught in public schools.

You do realize that James Hansen, head of the NASA Goddard Insitute played a huge role in bringing current climate change into the public spotlight. Hell he was being censored by the government and nearly lost his job.

John Holdren, one of Obama's newly appointed scientific advisors, is also another well respected scientist who has been doing research on climate change. He came to my school in fact and gave a damn good guest lecture.

And as I said earlier, a large number of professors and researchers in the academia field also don't dismiss it as junk science. The stereotype that it is "pony-taile hippy wanabee's" is true only as far as the general media is concerned. But to say that this is "junk science" done by people without a science degree is a bunch of crock. There are hundreds of well respected scientists doing research on this.

May their conclusions and assumptions be false? Absolutely. But don't instantly label it as junk science. There are actual real scientists doing real work, and I find that you are doing a huge disservice to genuine research when you call their work junk.

Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

No one almost lost their job over claiming "Global Warming is being caused by man", the reality is the people who were in jeopardy of losing their jobs were those who disented and pointed out that the science was junk.
Its still going on today and remember. NASA gets it's funding from someplace, where??? the Government and who holds the purse strings? Congress (not the President) and who's been bought out by the religion of Algore? Congress and anyone else who wants government funding.

Believe what you want. As you get older and the planet continues to not follow this scam or that scam, one thing you can be certain of, tax payer money will be siphoned off to whoever has the proper amount of alarmism and horror and who can kick money back to the right people.

I work in DC, I go to school where real live scientists in the nation spend their evenings making extra bucks teaching kids. I therefore believe I have a fair view of the issues. Your mileage may differ and Im not all that interested in trying to change anyone's mind. I post my thoughts and now have said all I intend to say. If you want to discuss it on a private level, thats fine you know how to reach me. But im not going to start that thing up here in public. (oops also forgot to mention that I used to get stationed at some of the Nations most remote weather facilities too while in service to the Nation)

The head of NASA did almost lose his job, it was over charges of his inability to control cost and budget issues.
The current Shuttle Replacement is one of those issues.....He could still get canned.

Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

I don't understand how this can be, given that they don't even know where the first protein came from, let alone a cell.

Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

My main gripe with your post is your instant labelling of it being a junk science done by people who are not "real" scientists. I do agree with you that there a large number of "pseudo-scientists". These are the ones that the mainstream media talk to and converse with. The media has done a terrible job of accurately covering this issue, as they do with nearly every damn thing.

There are real scientists doing real, genuine and novel research in these fields. The problem is scientists usually stick within their scientific community. These people couldn't give a damn about what the money maker research is. And again, they may be right or wrong in their assertions as to what is going on. I would be equally wrong if in the end, current analysis was proven to be wrong. Why? Because that is what science is. Creating a hypothesis, testing it, and proving or disproving it. Even if current theories turn out to be misproven, that just means we will have a better grasp of what is going on. That is what science is, the futhering of knowledge. So I take offense to when you instantly dismiss these individuals as people who are not "real" scientists, because they are doing fantastic and important work.

Re: Teaching enviromentalism "indoctrination"?
 

It doesn't have to have all the answers. Everything that we do know however, every tangible benefit and advancement that we do see today has come from these basic principles. It may not have all the answers in the world, but we sure as hell have a lot more answers and understanding than we did before operating on the assumption that some deity created everything.