Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumWyoming Bans Teaching Climate Change in Schools
From Ring of Fire:
The state of Wyoming has blocked a set of national teaching standards for science because the standards will teach students about climate change. Conservative lawmakers in Wyoming said that the standards indoctrinate kids with politics rather than teach actual science. Nevermind that science is how scientists came to their conclusions about climate change in the first place.
The Next Generation Science Standards were developed over the last four years by the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and many states to provide uniform, scientific curricula for K-12 students. So far, nine states and Washington D.C. have adopted the Next Generation Science Standards, reports Smithsonian Magazine.
The standards handle global warming as settled science, said Republican state Rep. Matt Teeters R-Lingle. Theres all kind of social implications involved in that that I dont think would be good for Wyoming.
You can read the full article here at Ring of Fire.
phantom power
(25,966 posts)Look, he accidentally spoke the truth, right there. Which is why conservatives are so terrified of people understanding it that they'll try to ban it instead.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)I can never understand what is so wrong with trying to clean the World. Even if they don't believe in climate change, why not just clean the world. That is worthy to me.
ladjf
(17,320 posts)Perhaps, the idea that the human race is causing the climate change conflicts with their fundamentalist views. They believe that God is in charge of climate , not humans.
phantom power
(25,966 posts)The first is the usual follow-the-money reason. The fix is to stop burning fossil fuels. The fossil fuel industries don't want us to stop burning fossil fuels, and they have lots of money to buy politicians with.
The second is that accepting climate change undermines religious fundies, because it implies that there's No One In Charge, except for us humans. And we're clearly not in charge, either.
The third is that climate change can only be dealt with via large-scale, coordinated government action. Probably world-wide coordinated action. Conservatives, of course, don't want to discuss anything that fucks up their privatized, individual-uber-alles narrative.
The fourth is that it has now effectively become tribal politics. Conservatives deny climate change because liberals don't.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)atreides1
(16,103 posts)The world is going to end soon, why waste time trying to clean up the planet?
Botany
(70,635 posts)The standards handle global warming as settled science,
newfie11
(8,159 posts)Look at us now, we've gone a long way down in the last 20 years or so. The dumbing is here!
newfie11
(8,159 posts)Those companies rule Wyoming.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Especially when the science is politically unpalatable.
defacto7
(13,485 posts)The only "social implication" involved in teaching global warming is a word called "education" which, second of all, seems to be a concept you are unfamiliar with considering your language skills, Theres all kind of social implications involved in that that...".
At least repeat 4th grade before lecturing others concerning the credibility of a virtually unanimous scientific conclusion. All remaining implications for the state of Wyoming may depend on it.
Nihil
(13,508 posts)"Which state is the dumbest?"
"Who has the voted in the most retarded representatives?"
"What was the inspiration for 'Idiocracy' ?"