By Meteorologist Bill Smith
I recently came across an article in the quarterly journal American Educator: “Teaching Climate Change,” Vol 43, No. 4. The authors have an obvious agenda and are promoting propaganda. The article is alarmist and rife with statements that are simply not true. I found this sentence to be the most troubling:
“Given the scientific consensus on the cause of global warming and climate change, teachers should teach the scientifically accepted perspective on global warming and climate change – not debate it.”
Science does not work by consensus. Scientific findings are always being tested and up for debate. One investigator, with irrefutable evidence, can shatter consensus. It is accepted that the atmosphere is warming. However, scientists do not agree that it is entirely due to human activity, nor do they agree that it is warming at an alarming rate. The “97% Consensus” canard is a bogus statistic resulting from biased filtering and small sample sizes.
On the other hand, the article does encourage data collection and analysis. This is laudable and these activities demonstrate how the scientific method works. However, it will not demonstrate any changes in climate, local or otherwise, since that requires the analysis of 30 years of continuous data.
Students would be better served if they were taught critical thinking skills and encouraged to debate analytical results.
Categories: Uncategorized
Chris Martz 
did you post that article?…..am I missing it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
No, meteorologist Bill Smith did. He is a new contributor for my blog.
LikeLike