Help! My child was subjected to right wing, anti-global warming You Tube videos, in science class...

[Fridays Child]

...today. Here's a link to the first video in the series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpWa7VW-OME

From what I've been able to find out, it looks like these films are from a group called freedommovement.info, which is owned by some guy named Michael Baker. Does anyone know anything about him or his site? Is this one of those astroturf groups that's really sponsored by the oil or coal industry?

My child was also given a multi-page worksheet, in conjunction with the viewing of these videos. Basically, the worksheet asks the student to regurgitate the material by filling in the blanks with words found in statements taken, verbatim, from the videos. Then, the student is instructed to argue either in favor of or against the premise of the videos, that man-made global-warming is a hoax. However, the class has not been provided with any material that presents any opposing views. The students are only informed, by these You Tube videos, that it's a hoax and, in so many words, that Al Gore is an idiot.

I plan to complain to the school administration that the teacher is trying to shove her right wing political views, disguised as science, down my child's throat. But I need information. Can any DUers who are better informed than I am on these matters help me out or just point me in the proper direction to combat this garbage?

This is a high school freshman class, by the way.

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

[davidinalameda]

1. it looks like it's a tinfoil hat group

http://freedom.akweb.com/

The Constitution was intended by the Framers to limit the powers of government, promote personal responsibility, and protect our liberty interests as citizens. Yet today, through stealth and the endless "War on Terror" and "Global Warming" jingohism that's being propagandized to an emergency-managed and willfuly-gullible public, the globalist, left-wing, neo-conservatives and their socialist comrades in crime have taken over our government. Together, they are dismantling the Constitution and undermining our Republic. The American Freedom Movement is a think tank and political action group dedicated to correcting these abuses before it's too late. We invite you to join us in our struggle at http://FreedomMovement.info

http://www.mogulus.com/afmtv

the freedommovement,info link takes you to the first link I posted

it's a message board-looks like Ron Paul-9/11 conspiracy therorists/anti-global warming/anti war on terror

[CrispyQ]

2. I don't have kids, so I don't know much about today's school systems.

However, if you push to have an alternative view presented, "The 11th Hour" was a very good movie that spoke about more than climate change. (And also doesn't have the polarizing influence of Al Gore.) It discussed life style & sustainability & how we have turned our eco-system into a resource center for consumerist lifestyles. We are eating up our eco-system, our lifeblood, so we can have stuff. It was very good & narrated by Leonardo DiCaprio. There were guests ranging from Thom Hartmann to an American Indian, who presented their way of looking at our relationship with Earth.

I can't believe how tenacious & successful the right wing has been at infiltrating our public school systems.

Good luck with this fight. It's one worth fighting.

k&r

[exman]

3. have faith

Your children are smart enough to see through this dreck.

[Hekate]

4. Go to the website dwickham found and print out a sample of their statement of purpose...

That's the beginning of your folder for combatting this teacher's misinformation and propaganda. Basically, this teacher is using a political source to teach a science class. What next in her lesson plan?

What are your local school board's standards, what are the state standards, that's info you might need before talking to the principal.

This is so outrageous. I'm Reccing it up so hopefully some of our science members can help out. DU actually has an Environment forum, and I would recommend cross-posting over there.

Hekate

[Fridays Child]

5. All good advice!

Thanks!

[Ichingcarpenter]

6. The guy doesn't have a science degree let alone a college degree

Its a fringe group that doesn't have any place in the classroom

[smoogatz]

35. The teacher doesn't have a science degree, either, most likely.

Probably an ed major. It's the great flaw in our education system: teachers are taught to make bulletin boards and lesson plans, but they often don't have much training in the field in which they end up teaching.

[napoleon_in_rags]

7. "the global warming media scare has become a religion"

and "the orthodoxy" of it global warming folks are mentioned. How do right wingers do it? How do they condemn the idea that burning fossil fuels in mass has an effect on the planets air as "silly religion", yet embrace the idea that Noah fit all the worlds animals on an ark as religion that makes sense???

[dubeskin]

8. Interesting

In my science class we got just the opposite. We watched An Inconvenient Truth, did a worksheet, explored the causes and what not. We even did an experiment to prove Al Gore is right. And that's in a pretty rightwing town, mind you.

[adamuu]

32. I dont consider that to be the opposite of what i described in the OP n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

9. Why don't I ever seen you post things in the Env/Energy forum?

This thing is so over the top, I have a hard time with giving you
a rational answer, because it almost smells like bullshit.

There is enough data and links in that forum that you
could even teach a class with.

[Hekate]

11. Why the hostility? I take the OP at face value: a parent confronted with a bad teacher...

Why would a random DUer, a parent, be posting over in the Environment forum unless it was a particular interest of his/hers already? You never see me over there, either. Does that mean if I had a question I'd also be jumped on for not already knowing the answer?

Hekate

[Ichingcarpenter]

18. Why are you answering for her?

She is able to do that to me and not you.

I'm telling her where to go to get answers and you are
just telling me where to go.

[Hekate]

Did I indeed?

:shrug:

[Fridays Child]

24. Over the top? Almost smells like bullshit?

WTF is your problem? If this is how you chime in with helpful information, spare me, please.

[OregonBlue]

39. Huh? You are the one that sounds "over the top". To me this was just a concerned

parent.

[1]

10. omg! my child was exposed to an idea! one i don't agree with! omg! omg!

how can this happen in america!

*throws up hands!*


first of all, chill. your child is going to be exposed to all sorts of ideas you don't agree with. you cannot keep him/her in a glass jar and protect them from all foreign ideas.


talk with your child. in your own post "the student is instructed to argue either in favor of or against the premise of the videos."

why is that concept so scary to you? don't like the videos? argue against! loudly!


come on. people have ideas you don't agree with. learn to deal with it. teach your child to deal with it.

why is that so hard?

[pnwmom]

12. Wrong. In a high school science class, students are supposed to only be

exposed to actual science, not propaganda by right wing know-nothings.

If a debate or social studies teacher wanted this to be discussed, fine. But then both sides would be presented, not just one.

[1]

13. "actual science."

now there's a concept.

go back and read my post again. and tell me how that is harmful to an open mind...

[ConsAreLiars]

14. Your advocacy of teaching non-actual science is completely consistent

with your other positions. Aren't you special? Nothing like a goober posing as a wizard to make folks laugh. Thanks for all the funnies.

[1]

16. no. but your concept of "actual science" is funny...

theory is one thing.

proven science is another. (emphasis on the "proven")

what is your point?

[ConsAreLiars]

17. You don't get the point of the difference?

Color me "not surprised." Science is a process of better approximation, not absolute truth, but I don't expect you or your other right wingers to ever understand that sort of thing.

[1]

20. and the point of teaching sometimes is to challenge the mind....

present an idea to a child and ask them to support or refute it. which is exactly what the lesson is here. omg! how right wing of me!

ask a child to attempt to present proof one way or another. or does your "science" not believe in that. your science is nothing more than we already know, there is nothing more to be learned or proven.

you seem only to want nice, agreeable and convenient concepts to be shown to students. never make them question a supposition or stand up for a different thought.

i weep for your way of teaching. it will never foster any sort of thinking. just rote regurgitation.

** remove comment that was rude **

[ConsAreLiars]

22. I don't think lying to kids is a good thing. We disagree. So be it. (nt)

[1]

27. "lying" is such a subjective term. asking children to think is the point... n/t

[smoogatz]

34. The OP's point was that students were only presented with one side

of the argument: the global warming denier side. Based solely on that information, they were then asked to agree or disagree. You can't effectively argue the merits of current climate science if you're not given access to the science. The only reason any teacher would do that is if they were (transparently) pushing a particular point of view. The science of climate change is pretty clear cut: more atmospheric carbon equals a warmer planet, and humans are pumping huge amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. The theory's been in place at least since I was in high school, and now we're seeing the effects: melting ice caps, etc., just as predicted (worse, in fact). Only idiots and energy industry shills would publicly deny that it's happening, or that human activity is a major factor. There's no scientific debate, any more than there's scientific debate on the validity of creationism: that train left the station a long time ago. The only debate is political—but this isn't civics class, or whatever they call it now. It's supposed to be a science class, and the teacher should teach the science--not the wingnut conspiracy theory of the month.

[OregonBlue]

37. Exactly what I was going to say. If both sides are presented then a student can be asked to

argue the case. Presenting one side and asking a student to agree or disagree is very poor teaching.

[Ignis]

48. Yes, let's tell kids that gravity is only a theory...

Then we can lead them to the top of a building a find out which ones have developed critical thinking skills.

You win the prize! :dunce:

[pnwmom]

28. 9th grade students don't have enough background knowledge to judge

the flaws in the pseudo-scientific arguments. The teachers have an obligation to teach them science as recognized and practiced by the vast majority of professionals in the field, not a handful of quacks and dissidents.

[Ichingcarpenter]

19. Because you can not stand up to scrutiny

in the scientific forums here.

[1]

21. my god, the closed minds here about teaching children to actually think.

you seem to only want them to agree.

how progressive...

[pnwmom]

29. You don't teach a child to think scientifically -- like a scientist -- by

confusing them with half-baked ideas that scientists strongly reject.

[JVS]

36. Yeah, I was in class one day and my teacher started explaining about these half-baked ideas.

She was going on about these things that still need to be proven. I think they were called hypotheses, but I had already tuned out because I knew she was just spewing bullshit and science is all about truth.

[Ignis]

47. How's that theory of electricity working out for you?

Or are you not able to use that computer to post in reply, because, y'know, you have an "open mind?"

:eyes:

If they taught astrology in my kid's astronomy class, I'd be pretty pissed off. Why is this so hard for you to understand? What's your agenda here?

[pepperbear]

15. I am going to frighten you.......what if the school takes the same position?

I shudder at the thought.

[Fridays Child]

25. I hope not! But, if they do...

...I won't go along with it.

[ColbertWatcher]

23. That doesn't sound like a science class to me. n/t

[Fridays Child]

26. I will make that point.

:)

[struggle4progress]

30. Here's how I would handle it if I were you:

Avoid getting into a discussion about whether global warming is really occurring, whether human activities are causing global warming, or what the exact impacts of global warming would be: those are scientific questions, which must be decided by scientific methods. Avoid calling people rightwingers or using other politically charged language. A very polite letter, containing your concerns in writing, might be a better than an attempt at a verbal debate on global warming

(1) You are concerned that the teacher seems to be misusing the school science class as a propaganda outlet. The purpose of a school science class is to teach students something about how modern science works: how experts produce and improve scientific knowledge by developing and testing scientific theories

(2) There is reason to think the youtube piece is propaganda

(2)(a)(i) It distributed by "akweb.com" which appears to be the website of Mike Baker of Chugiak AK: http://www.breakthematrix.com/users/Mike%2BBaker
(2)(a)(ii) Mr Baker's odd views include "Obama is nothing but a white man, pretending to be a black man who's pretending to be a white man": http://www.campaignforliberty.com/user/Mike_Baker/

(2)(b)(i) There are a number of specific technical questions that must be addressed to determine whether global warming is really occurring, whether human activities are causing global warming, and what the exact impacts of global warming would be. See (say) "The AR4 Synthesis Report.
Working Group I Report 'The Physical Science Basis' ": http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm
(2)(b)(ii) Such technical questions must be studied by experts. A major problem with the propaganda youtube shown in the science class is that non-experts pretend to speak with authority about subjects they do not study. For example:
(2)(b)(ii)(1) The youtube piece shows Ian Clark discussing the effect of global warming on polar bears. However, Clark's scientific expertise is isotope hydrogeology, not polar bear ecology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Clarkhydrogeology
(2)(b)(ii)(2) Similarly, the youtube piece shows Syun-Ichi Akasofu discussing global warming. However, Akasofu's scientific expertise is the aurora borealis and related phenomena, not global climate modeling: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syun-Ichi_Akasofu
(2)(b)(ii)(3) Nigel Calder, shown in the the youtube piece, is not a scientist but a documentary film-maker who promotes conspiratorial views about global warming: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Calder

(2)(c) Scientists must search impartially for the true facts, without special interest, and report their results accurately. Unfortunately, many of the speakers quoted in the youtube piece fail these trests
(2)(c)(i) For example, Patrick Michaels misrepresented his position at the University of Virginia and resigned in a scandal resulting from his politicization of the position: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pat_Michaels
(2)(c)(ii) Michaels has also regularly received funding from fossil fuel organizations, such as the German Coal Association, that represent industry groups whose economic interests might be hurt if global warming were known to be caused by human activity and were known to have potentially serious impacts: http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=4
(2)(c)(iii) Similarly, Richard Lindzen has regularly received funding from fossil fuel organizations that represent industry groups whose economic interests might be hurt if global warming were known to be caused by human activity and were known to have potentially serious impacts: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_Lindzen
(2)(c)(iv) Similarly, Fred Singer has received funding from fossil fuel organizations that represent industry groups whose economic interests might be hurt if global warming were known to be caused by human activity and were known to have potentially serious impacts; he also has a history of producing lobbying materials for special interest groups such as the tobacco industry: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fred_Singer
(2)(c)(v) Similarly, Tim Ball is (according to the Calgary Herald) "a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist": http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tim_Ball
2(d) Thus, rather than quoting real scientists, the youtube piece appears to be quoting lobbyists masquerading as scientists or former scientists who have become lobbyists

(3) Many excellent scientific materials are available on the topic of global warming. Such materials would be appropriate in a science class. Propaganda, however, is not appropriate

[adamuu]

33. wow struggle4progress. you definitely get an A+ for the day. :) n/t

[HeeBGBz]

38. Excellent response

I would go with that one.

[OregonBlue]

40. Great response. Hope the "teacher" gets a copy too!!

[gristy]

42. Wow. I commend the effort you've put in to compose this excellent response.

:thumbsup:

And I agree with your view that the parent not get into the debate about whether global warming is really occurring.

[dobegrrrl]

31. Please do complain

I teach government -12 grade- and every administration that I have worked with would be very unhappy with this situation. The usual case is right wing nut jobs complaining about what they perceive as bias.
Good luck.

[madville]

41. Both sides are unproven so both should be presented

I would find out what the lesson plan is and see if they will be showing Al Gore's movie next week or something.

Why not just call the teacher and ask?

Right-wingers freak out when schools show Al Gore's movie, it's not like they are forcing birth control or a religion on these kids. In my opinion both sides are unproven so both sides should be presented and let the kids debate and decide for themselves.

[gristy]

44. Both sides are certainly not unproven

Most assuredly

[lame54]

43. I hope they balanced it with Some Creationism vids

[Fridays Child]

45. Yeah, really!

[roody]

46. Look up the ninth grade science standards on your state's

department of ed website. Then when you talk to the teacher and principal, you can ask how this fits into the curriculum.

[otohara]

49. They Need to Visit A Big Landfill

One of those huge, big ass ones. Big heaping piles of human waste pumping methane and seeping toxin into our air, grounds and water. If they see destruction up close and personal - it sinks in.

[TrogL]

50. Ask to see the Department of Education curriculum guidelines

...and be shown where this is approved teaching materials.

If it's not, raise it with the proper authorities.

If it is, it's time to get into politics.

[GreenPartyVoter]

51. Find out first if other lines of thought were presented. It might just be a case of

showing more than one side of an issue.

In the meantime you can tell your kid what _you_ think and hopefully that will carry more weight.