LAC mistake for a conservative kid?

<p>

</p>

<p>geeps, I think you’re misunderstanding my point. Let me be more explicit. </p>

<p>The overwhelming majority of scientists, if polled, would say that global warming exists. The vast majority would say that it has been caused by or exacerbated by humans. I understand that you do not agree with their viewpoint, but that’s not the issue. With very few exceptions, a college student taking science courses is going to have professors who would simply never consider the issue as being something that can be discussed at the macro level. At the micro level, sure. There are lots of papers that will say hey, here’s some temperature data we didn’t expect given current global warming models. There are also lots of papers that will provide a better model that explains some of the data other papers are seeing. That’s the level of discussion you’d see in the classroom. </p>

<p>Yes, there are a very small number of scientists who say there is no such thing as global warming. There’s a larger, but still relatively small number of scientists who say there is global warming, but it isn’t caused by humans, or that all of the data aren’t in yet. Odds are that your son isn’t going to have one of these professors in a science course, because there are very very few of these professors. With the exception of some religiously affiliated schools which require an affirmation of faith, I don’t think you will be able to find any school that has a large number of science professors who would agree with you.</p>

<p>Bottom line: your expectations, at least for science classes, are unrealistic.</p>

<p>“The overwhelming majority of scientists, if polled, would say that global warming exists.”</p>

<p>can you back this up? sounds like your opinion</p>

<p>Wikipedia collects all sorts of polls and statements from science organizations together at <a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change&lt;/a&gt;. The most recent poll is from 2009.</p>

<p>

</code></pre>

<p>[Survey:</a> Scientists agree human-induced global warming is real](<a href=“http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-01/uoia-ssa011609.php]Survey:”>http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-01/uoia-ssa011609.php)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Please also read the many, many citations at [Logicalscience.com</a> - The Consensus On Global Warming/Climate Change: From Science to Industry & Religion](<a href=“Consensus On Global Warming – Consensus Of Top Personalities | Logical Science”>Consensus On Global Warming – Consensus Of Top Personalities | Logical Science)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I understand the source of your exasperation. It reminds me of an argument I got into about the supposed 9/11 conspiracy, where my opponent cited a coalition of scientists who agreed with it. I looked them up, and it was a bizarre compilation of people, almost none of them with any qualifications relevant to the fall of the towers. </p>

<p>I would absolutely agree that the current paradigm or accepted belief in science is that global warming is real. There is some real dissent, however; one MIT professor in the Earth & Planetary Sciences Dept. has done research suggesting that global warming is not real. Unfortunately, science is messy and sometimes you get contradictory studies. (I haven’t read his research, so I don’t know the details.) I doubt, however, this is what the Bush administration (or most conservatives who believe global warming is a myth) used to arrive at their conclusion. I know the Bush administration commissioned a study on global warming and then hired a team of lawyers to black out all the parts of the report they didn’t like. Anyway, the consensus is, indeed, that global warming is real and manmade. However, those that suggest that it may be otherwise are not all crackpots.</p>

<p>so, it’s a fact because 3,000 scientist think so? How about the other 7,000 that didn’t respond?..Sorry, that doesn’t prove a thing.</p>

<p>Serious question: Why do liberals want(need) there to be man made global warming? Show me the proof one way or the other and I’m fine with it…but liberals need this to be true…why?</p>

<p>BTW, I’ve seen very convincing arguments for and against man made GW. I wonder if those that believe it to be true have seen the opposing arguments…and more importantly, if true, what will be the effect…devastating consequences?..or minor changes …and what model would you think would get more press, a 100 year model showing North America under water, or one that showed minor cyclical changes?</p>

<p>So, geeps, you don’t want your son exposed to scientific consensus, unless you agree with that scientific consensus.</p>

<p>Time for you to homeschool, then.</p>

<p>“Show me the proof one way or the other and I’m fine with it”</p>

<p>Please show us the proof of any of the facts that you believe have an appropriate place in a university curriculum. I am very interested in your process.</p>

<p>Owlice: while I understand your sentiment, many of us homeschooled as a way to expose our kids to more points of views, not fewer.</p>

<p>owlice…nice try…I like how you try to twist everything. I won’t repeat my stance again, I would think you would be able to comprehend it by now.</p>

<p>"BTW, I’ve seen very convincing arguments for and against man made GW. "</p>

<p>With all due respect, whether <em>you</em> are convinced by the argument one way or another isn’t as relevant as whether actual, real scientists who study climate change are convinced. </p>

<p>The phenomenon of just wanting to believe what you want to believe because it sounds plausible to you, but you don’t have any real facts, just your gut, is what my classmate Stephen Colbert referred to as “truthiness.”</p>

<p>alh…If you are talking about GW…arguments can be made for and against MAN MADE warming and the effects. I said before, I would have no problem with this type of discussion in the classroom.</p>

<p>geeps discovers that he or she has no basis for disputing the existence of the consensus (other than an unfounded and rather illogical assumption that those who <em>didn’t</em> answer the survey believe differently from those who did, when logic would dictate that climatologists who dispute global warming would <em>want</em> their views publicized), and quickly changes the subject.</p>

<p>The idea that this is fundamentally a liberal vs. conservative issue is absurd (it’s akin to suggesting that there’s a liberal vs. conservative position on whether the earth goes around the sun). But to the extent a certain breed of conservatives (e.g. the Wall Street Journal editorial board) professes not to accept the consensus on global warming, it’s pretty clear why they “need” man-made global warming <em>not</em> to exist. I don’t even need to ask.</p>

<p>“With all due respect, whether <em>you</em> are convinced by the argument one way or another isn’t as relevant as whether actual, real scientists who study climate change are convinced.”</p>

<p>some do, some don’t…it is not a fact and shouldn’t be taught as such…</p>

<p>DonnaL…why do you need it to be true? Have you researched GW yourself?</p>

<p>geeps, please understand that I am not trying to “convert” you. I am not arguing about global warming itself. I am giving you these numbers and these polls so that you can understand that the vast majority of science professors will not agree with you on global warming. Surely you can look at this poll and think “OK, I accept that the vast majority of scientists say that global warming occurs and is man-made, even though I think they’re wrong.” </p>

<p>I am curious if you feel this skeptical about all polls. </p>

<p>I’m a liberal. I don’t WANT global warming, man made or otherwise. I don’t NEED it. It’s a PITA, and it’s causing all kinds of tedious complications in my life, large and small.</p>

<p>Slithey…most polls are indeed biased…and for heaven’s sake, don’t trust the media, fair journalism is long gone.</p>

<p><scratches head=“”></scratches></p>

<p>Did I say before that there’d be very few schools you’d be able to find that fit your criteria? </p>

<p>I was too optimistic. There aren’t any.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I haven’t twisted anything. It appears I <em>do</em> comprehend your stance, which is why you responded as you did.</p>

<p>alh, I know many people who have homeschooled to broaden their kids’ educational opportunities and horizons. geeps doesn’t strike me as one of those parents.</p>

<p>geeps20: No I don’t mean GW. You keep saying you want only facts taught. I don’t understand what “facts” means to you. And where this curriculum of facts is supposed to come from in your world view.</p>

<p>owlice: I was actually thinking of the homeschooling college option for the family myself.</p>