iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Fighting Climate Change Through Innovative Initiatives


First Posted: 05/19/2011 7:40 pm Updated: 07/19/2011 5:12 am

Floods and droughts may be the "new normal" and sea levels may be rising faster than previously thought, but the younger generation isn't willing to accept these climate change consequences for their future. As the grownups duke it out in Washington, kids take action with visible results, proving they may be more capable than adults in fighting man-made climate change.

Over 200,000 young people nationwide from over 2,500 schools participated in the Green Your School Challenge, a program that encouraged students to create initiatives focused on recycling, energy, climate change and food issues in their schools. Last week, the "Top 10 Green Schools" were revealed: Millburn Senior High School, Chapel Hill High School, Durand Middle School, University of Central Florida, City Academy, Canyon Crest Academy, Boston Latin, Indian Springs School, Santa Barbara High School and Garden Grove High School.

Perhaps Congress would be more invested in climate change action if they celebrated "Recycling Spies Day," a Chapel Hill High School initiative where "spies" offered rewards to random people they spotted recycling. The school also installed motion-sensitive light switches in teachers' lounges and hosted an eco-carnival.

Many students go the extra mile to fight climate change because they are aware that it threatens their generation more than the previous ones. As a Boston Latin student said about his group's efforts, "We are the people that will have to live in the future, and we should be allowed a healthy and clean planet."

It should be noted that, clearly, this younger generation was not born aware of climate change challenges. The positive actions of kids should be attributed at least in part to their teachers and parents. That said, adults are also responsible for any misinformation provided to students. Patch reports that a California school board recently ordered a global warming class to include the "conservative view" on climate change, with Board member Jeffrey Barke telling Patch, "I believe my role in the board is to represent the conservative voice of the community and I'm not a big fan of global warming."

Last year the New York Times reported on a South Dakota resolution which called for the "balanced teaching of global warming in public schools," and stated that "Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but rather a highly beneficial ingredient for all plant life." While it is necessary for students to learn different opinions on various theories, man-made climate change is an accepted phenomenon in the great majority of the scientific community. As a USA Today piece recently stated, climate change skeptics should be regarded in the same fashion as birthers, "a vocal minority that refuses to accept overwhelming evidence."

Despite the occasional influence from a climate change skeptic, global warming concerns seem to have permeated the younger generation. Over the past few weeks, young people from 25 countries participated in the largest ever climate change youth march. Organized by iMatter, thousands of young activists attended marches across the globe. Alec Loorz, who founded the organization at age 13, said, "Young people will be affected most by decisions that are made today and yet we can't vote, and we don't have money to compete with lobbyists... We do, however, have the moral authority and the legal right to insist that our future be protected."

The organization iMatter also recently initiated legal and administrative action in every U.S. state to encourage "Climate Recovery Plans."

10-year-old Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez is one of the Boulder County youths who, joined by WildEarth Guardians, is suing the State of Colorado for failing to protect the environment. Roske-Martinez previously told The Huffington Post, "We're doing this because our future's in jeopardy and they're not doing a thing... so we're telling them to shape up."

Opportunities are springing up across the globe for children and young adults to become involved in the fight to combat man-made climate change. The U.S. non-profit Cool the Earth, founded by parents in the San Francisco Bay Area concerned about the well-being of future generations, offers free environmental climate change assembly programs to schools and communities across the nation.

The program now runs in 100 U.S. schools, using a child-driven model to reach 75,000 kids and their families, and has so far reduced carbon emissions by 100 million pounds. Cool The Earth's Jenny Jedeikin told The Huffington Post, "We're funded to offer our program free to more communities; we just have to connect with people who are interested in taking action."

Perhaps today's youth will be the generation interested enough to take the actions needed to combat climate change.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

Floods and droughts may be the "new normal" and sea levels may be rising faster than previously thought, but the younger generation isn't willing to accept these climate change consequences for their...
Floods and droughts may be the "new normal" and sea levels may be rising faster than previously thought, but the younger generation isn't willing to accept these climate change consequences for their...
Floods and droughts may be the "new normal" and sea levels may be rising faster than previously thought, but the younger generation isn't willing to accept these climate change consequences for their...
Floods and droughts may be the "new normal" and sea levels may be rising faster than previously thought, but the younger generation isn't willing to accept these climate change consequences for their...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,380
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (13 total)
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
01:56 PM on 05/31/2011
The following are scientific facts:

* The Earth has warmed significantly over recent decades, to what may be the highest level in 2,000 years if not far longer.

* Greenhouse gases including anthropogenic CO2 -- which is generated mostly by fossil fuel burning -- warm the Earth. Without greenhouse gases the average temperature of the Earth would be below freezing.

* Satellite measurements demonstrate that increasing atmospheric CO2 has increased heat energy retention in the atmosphere­.

* Atmospheric CO2 has increased ~40% since the dawn of the fossil fuel era to the highest level in at least 800,000 years, if not far longer.

* The scientific evidence strongly indicates that said increased atmospheric CO2 is due to anthropogenic CO2 emissions, and there is no other viable scientific explanation­ for said atmospheric CO2 increase.

* There is a strong correlation­­­ between said atmospheric­­­ CO2 increase and said recent warming.

* Known natural forcing agents of past global warming - including changes in orbital cycles and increases in solar radiative output - cannot explain the bulk of said recent warming. Neither has any scientific theory to explain the bulk of said recent warming other than anthropogenic global warming survived scientific scrutiny.

Again these are all scientific facts. Which is to say:

The scientific evidence supporting anthropogenic global warming is overwhelming.
12:17 PM on 05/31/2011
The deliberate manipulation of children to provide support for political initiatives such as Al Gore's Warming (AGW) is one of the moral lowpoints of our times. The CO2-alarmism itself is an intellectual low point, given the complete, and I mean complete, absence of evidence that recent increases in CO2 are important, even discernible, drivers of climate.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
01:38 PM on 05/31/2011
SecondTime: "...given the complete, and I mean complete, absence of evidence that recent increases in CO2 are important, even discernibl­e, drivers of climate."

Given that you SecondTime have been duped by science denier sites into believing that the Moon violates the Laws of Physics and I can how you'd be completely, and I mean completely, wrong here too.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
02:05 PM on 05/31/2011
U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010:
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­------

Scientific knowledge builds over time as theories are refined and expanded and as new observations and data confirm or refute the predictions of current theories and models. Confidence in a theory grows if it survives this rigorous testing process, if multiple lines of evidence lead to the same conclusion, or if competing explanations can be ruled out.

In the case of climate science, this process of learning extends back more than 150 years...

Scientists working in the late 19th century [recognized] that carbon dioxide (CO2) and other GHGs have a profound effect on the Earth’s temperature. A Swedish scientist named Svante Arrhenius was the first to hypothesize that the burning of fossil fuels, which releases CO2, would eventually lead to global warming. This was the beginning of a more than 100-year history of ever more careful measurements and calculations to pin down exactly how GHG emissions and other factors influence Earth’s climate...

Thus, scientists have understood for a long time that the basic principles of chemistry and physics predict that burning fossil fuels will lead to increases in the Earth’s average surface temperature.

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12782
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
03:33 AM on 05/29/2011
As the grownups duke it out in Washington, kids take action with visible results, proving they may be more capable than adults in fighting man-made climate change.

After 1,369 comments, this article has indeed been proved true.

Children 7 points
Adults zero points
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jimboy71
Hen Diapheron Heautoi
11:35 AM on 05/29/2011
Finger painting has always solved all the world's problems.

Do apple pie homilies always work for you?

Absurd.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
04:13 PM on 05/30/2011
I rest my case.
Thanks for supporting my comment with more proof.
Anyone out there interested in doing anything beyond talking?

Finger painting has accomplished as much as 1373 comments have.
Anyone out there have any ideas floating around?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KarlaElisa
The atmosphere is Toxic
11:27 AM on 05/25/2011
they should be afraid. they're going to live with the consequences of industrial civilization as it crashes around them.

they want to fight this culture of death and destruction? start by rejecting everything industrial civ tells you is 'good and necessary'. the only truly sustainable, renewable way to live is the stone age, so prepare yourselves children.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jimspy
Quod quae operibus sufficit.
05:03 PM on 06/12/2011
So you really DO think we need to go back to the Stone Age? Do you think that position is going to win over the deniers?

As you know I'm a strong proponent of Climate Change, but my function here is only to support the science and tell the deniers they've got their heads in the sand. I think what's coming is coming no matter what, and I'm not about to go Flintstones just to try and avoid the inevitable.

Now, if this kid's initiative starts taking hold....MAYBE...MAYBE there's some hope. It's certainly a bright spot.
photo
FormerReaganite
Government Regulations Save Lives
12:13 AM on 05/25/2011
"Teach your children well..."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SaucyD
Can you hear me now!
09:08 PM on 05/24/2011
"....man-made climate change is an accepted phenomenon in the great majority of the scientific community."

Collective heads are exploding....to the right, to the right....
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
08:49 PM on 05/24/2011
U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010:
------------------------------------------------------------------

Human activities are influencing climate. As discussed in the following chapters, scientific evidence that the Earth is warming is now overwhelming. There is also a multitude of evidence that this warming results primarily from human activities, especially burning fossil fuels and other activities that release heat-trapping greenhouse gases (GHGs) into the atmosphere. Projections of future climate change indicate that Earth will continue to warm unless significant and sustained actions are taken to limit emissions of GHGs.

Increasing temperatures and GHG concentrations are driving a multitude of related and interacting changes in the Earth system, including decreases in the amounts of ice stored in mountain glaciers and polar regions, increases in sea level, changes in ocean chemistry, and changes in the frequency and intensity of heat waves, precipitation events, and droughts. These changes in turn pose significant risks to both human and ecological systems. Although the details of how the future impacts of climate change will unfold are not as well understood as the basic causes and mechanisms of climate change, we can reasonably expect that the consequences of climate change will be more severe if actions are not taken to limit its magnitude and adapt to its impacts.

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12782
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
03:45 PM on 05/24/2011
OOOOPS!! 500-1000 years ago.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alteredstory
Hold on to the center
04:11 PM on 05/24/2011
Excuse me, sir, you dropped your context.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
04:23 PM on 05/24/2011
Sorry about the typo. I profusely apologize.
The above OOOPS!!!! goes with the below typo.
I'm fairly new to HP. Just poking around to see what's astir.
Sometimes it takes hours for my comment to appear.
Most comments never make it for some reason or other.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
04:25 PM on 05/24/2011
Dang if there isn't a reply button below my comment that I didn't see before.
I could have put my OOOPS!! in the right place.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
10:20 AM on 05/25/2011
You requested a discussion about science.

Stick with the facts, Ma'am. I have no opinion either way. Prove to me with science, without your religious chatter, one way or the other.

I gave you exactly that.

Okay, then let's start with the absorption and emission of infrared radiation, and how it differs from one gaseous molecule to the next. Can you tell me anything about the line spectrum of carbon dioxide? In other words, do you even understand the basics?

Why have you now lost interest in that discussion? You don't know anything about the real scientific theory involved, do you?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
11:35 AM on 05/25/2011
The thing is I accept all that the N.A.S. has said about AGW.
And for this, I am called a denier because I ask how the hell are we going to cut down on the amount of CO2 we release into the air.

Any scientific theory is a postulaton that one makes and they test this "theory" and try to disprove this theory in order to strengthen one's case. Science requires an open mind. Science requires that one looks at all claims against their theory. I personally think that what the N.A.S. has published is very good science. I am not afraid to test their theory. It is sound. It is a good springboard to look beyond to the future. You are calling a believer names like denier, mentally ill, stupid, ignorant, liar, claiming I don't know jackcrap about real science theory involved. That is very practical use of science.
PS: I don't have internet so must rely on family, friends and libraries for access. I suspect that also eliminates my ability to think in your eyes. I have been told so before. See. We are off topic again. This article is about our children, not our egos. We are pissing in their sand box. By the way, sand is a particularly hazardous material. It causes COPD. Check out the MSDS.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
01:19 PM on 05/25/2011
Repeat it again for clarity's sake. Use only scientific words. Don't take this as an insult. I truely wish to know. You don't have to repeat your definition of greenhouse gases and the differences between them. CO2 is a major GHG. That is a given.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
03:43 PM on 05/24/2011
Wasn't this an article about our children?
We tell our children: The sun rises in the East. The sky is blue. Stars twinkle. It's cold outside. Don't go down any dark alleys.
These are all lies we tell them based on the Judeo/Christian/Muslim Holy Books.
Science disproved all of the lies we tell our children 500-100 years ago.
The sun doesn't rise in the East. If there were a sky, it isn't blue. Stars doesn't twinkle. There is no such thing as cold or darkness. These are just our perception of things and our science denier minds.
Now we are going to tell them that we have created an anthropomorphic whipping boy (industry) to blame for screwing up the world for them instead of admitting that we did it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
04:28 PM on 05/24/2011
For our children's sake, let's pretend we are all Gabby Giffords clones and do what is best for them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
07:46 PM on 05/24/2011
What trait of Gabby Giffords are you referencing, exactly?
01:19 PM on 05/24/2011
People seem to have a need to feel the world is ending and only they can stop it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alteredstory
Hold on to the center
01:44 PM on 05/24/2011
Except nobody said the world was ending, and this really IS happening.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
12:43 PM on 05/25/2011
The world as we know it is ending.
The world is getting hotter.
We may end, but there is no reason
to believe that this world is ending
anytime soon.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
01:55 PM on 05/24/2011
Science deniers seem to not understand the difference between science and religion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
03:32 PM on 05/24/2011
You have been listening to me!!!!!!!!
Once you have looked up the words science and religion (and religious)
in the dictionary, you too will understand.
And soon I will figure out your true agenda.
You have been giving me clues for days.
Give me another hint, please.
What are we to do about AGW?
What do we tell our children about AGW?
I don't think that you belong to a religion. I never did.
I think it is a religious cult based on politics.
No god or deity is involved, just who is in control of our money in government.
Who is in power to dominate the people and distribute our monies to their cronies.
I don't think it is those sick Republicans.
It must be the other evil in this land, the Democrats.
The Republicans and Democrats are playing a game of chess
and We The People are the pawns.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
08:42 PM on 05/24/2011
wsmith3023: "Once you have looked up the words science and religion (and religious) in the dictionary­, you too will understand­."

Ironic science denier condescension is amusing.

['Ironic' is redundant this context, I know.]

Until you stop conflating science with religion you will continue to fundamentally misunderstand what science is, and isn't.

wsmith3023: "And soon I will figure out your true agenda."

You'll never truly figure out the agenda of those who don't deny science until you stop being a science denier.
01:10 PM on 05/24/2011
Here children, learn this lesson well. There is no money to be made selling low cost high mileage cars. Just ask Government run Chrysler.
http://detnews.com/article/20110524/MIVIEW/105240374/Payne--SUVs-saved-Chrysler
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
01:31 PM on 05/24/2011
"Just ask Government run Chrysler" if you're intent on falsifying your analysis that efficiency is unprofitable, and do not include companies that have done more, for longer, to produce high mileage vehicles. Definitely don't look at Nissan's 3y stock performance, because after the stock market crash when every manufacturing company stock dropped severely, in the time since then which happens to coincide the introduction of the all-electric Leaf, Nissan's performance would tell you the truth you don't want to know about efficiency and carbon emissions.
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/nsany
absolument
Debate the policy. But first, LEARN the science.
02:38 PM on 05/24/2011
Speaking of sunsetter being wrong, he's established a pattern here of saying things he doesn't know...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/arctic-melting-sea-levels-climate-change_n_856924_87082683.html
Publicola: "You (sunsetter) seem to be suggesting that the R-squared correlatio­n coefficien­t is too low here for the trend to be significan­t - why?"

... and making assertions he is not competent to defend, then responding only with abuse when he's asked to defend

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/sunsetter/arctic-melting-sea-levels-climate-change_n_856924_87116978.html
sunsetter: "300 out of 65,000 and you say I MUST PUBLISH? A child can figure out this is a scam."

... his claims about, for example, statistics, that are not true and which he does not know how to support.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/absolument/arctic-melting-sea-levels-climate-change_n_856924_87138339.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texfly/arctic-melting-sea-levels-climate-change_n_856924_87176336.html
texfly: "Your 2nd order fit is erroneous. If you look at the data
http://sea­level.colo­rado.edu/f­iles/curre­nt/sl_ib_g­lobal.jpg
that Pub posted you will see that 3 sensors were used. They had slightly different sensitivit­ies that account for the apparent fall-off you are claiming as a reduction."

Science deniers are always wrong but never in doubt.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dardedar
Not here to play patty cake...
10:44 PM on 05/24/2011
1) Socialism saved Chrysler.

2) The article forgets to mention the huge (socialist) government (socialist) tax subsidy (socialist) for buying extra heavy SUV's. Imagine that.

http://www.section179.org/section_179_vehicle_deductions.html

3) The Prius is currently selling above list price and is in such demand waiting lists are common.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2011-05-15-prius-price_n.htm

4) If SUV's are the cat's meow, wherefore Hummer?
12:41 PM on 05/24/2011
I see little difference in the psychological make-up of the warmists and the Camping crowd.

Both using skewed or made-up data to promote their agenda.

What is it about the need some have to feel the world is ending and "only my group" has the enlightened wisdom to save us all? I know it's a phenomena that's been seen throughout the history of man, but it's still strange.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jimboy71
Hen Diapheron Heautoi
08:41 PM on 05/24/2011
You fundamentally misunderstand science.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dardedar
Not here to play patty cake...
10:46 PM on 05/24/2011
Predictably, you forget to even attempt to bring an example. Not by accident for sure.

All of the science is against you. That is one doosey of a conspiracy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
11:46 PM on 05/24/2011
Yeah, the coup de grace was getting the carbon dioxide to cooperate.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris 1
09:19 AM on 05/24/2011
Want to know how "peer review" really works in the climate fraud?;

http://climateaudit.org/2011/05/23/climategate-documents-confirm-wegmans-hypothesis/

A tiny radical science backwater excludes all dissent and declares itself the "experts" with the help of leftwing hacks of all types. The agenda? Global taxes and regulation, wealth redistribution.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
10:23 AM on 05/24/2011
Thanks to the diligent efforts of U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OIL), we finally have a thorough investigation that has exposed the whole truth about climategate.

The inquiry, by the Commerce Department’s inspector general, focused on e-mail messages between climate scientists that were stolen and circulated on the Internet in late 2009 (NOAA is part of the Commerce Department). Some of the e-mails involved scientists from NOAA.
Climate change skeptics contended that the correspondence showed that scientists were manipulating or withholding information to advance the theory that the earth is warming as a result of human activity.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
11:50 AM on 05/24/2011
In a report dated Feb. 18 and circulated by the Obama administration on Thursday, the inspector general said, “We did not find any evidence that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data.”

Nor did the report fault Jane Lubchenco, NOAA’s top official, for testifying to Congress that the correspondence did not undermine climate science.

The finding comes at a critical moment for NOAA as some newly empowered Republican House members seek to rein in theEnvironmental Protection Agency’s plans to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, often contending that the science underpinning global warming is flawed. NOAA is the federal agency tasked with monitoring climate data.

The inquiry into NOAA’s conduct was requested last May by Senator James M. Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, who has challenged the science underlying human-induced climate change. Mr. Inhofe was acting in response to the controversy over the e-mail messages, which were stolen from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England, a major hub of climate research.

Mr. Inhofe asked the inspector general of the Commerce Department to investigate how NOAA scientists responded internally to the leaked e-mails. Of 1,073 messages, 289 were exchanges with NOAA scientists.
The inspector general reviewed the 1,073 e-mails, and interviewed Dr. Lubchenco and staff members about their exchanges. The report did not find scientific misconduct; it did however, challenge the agency over its handling of some Freedom of Information Act requests in 2007. And it noted the inappropriateness of e-mailing a collage cartoon depicting Senator Inhofe and five other climate skeptics marooned on a melting iceberg that passed between two NOAA scientists.

The report was not a review of the climate data itself. It joins a series of investigations by the British House of Commons, Pennsylvania State University, the InterAcademy Council and the National Research Council into the leaked e-mails that have exonerated the scientistsinvolved of scientific wrongdoing.

NOAA welcomed the report, saying that it emphasized the soundness of its scientific procedures and the peer review process.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
04:19 PM on 05/24/2011
Let's just quit using petroleum products and then these Climate Change Skeptics won't have any reason to oppose the Climate Change Believers. It will no longer be profitable to deny climate change.
photo
gallon
Those who fail to remember history are, um
10:54 AM on 05/24/2011
Get up to date. Wegman has been shown to be a fraud. Naturally a denier would try Wegman first.

For the gentle reader, Wegman was found to have plagiarized information in compiling his influential report to Senator Barton:

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2010-11-21-climate-report-questioned_N.htm

In another instance, another Wegman climate study gets pulled after charges of plagiarism:

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2011-05-15-climate-study-plagiarism-Wegman_n.htm

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2011/05/retracted-climate-critics-study-panned-by-expert-/1

You climate deniers should consider hiring Orly Taitz as your spokesperson. She is available.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dardedar
Not here to play patty cake...
10:51 PM on 05/24/2011
Actually, I think she's busy with her next conspiracy. Something to do with Obama's selective service number (not joking). Sounds really bad. He may have to be impeached.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris 1
09:16 AM on 05/24/2011
Proto-typical communist tactics of brainwashing children into the cult of leftist principals. Next they will be sing the praises of Mao.
photo
gallon
Those who fail to remember history are, um
10:18 AM on 05/24/2011
The new conspiracy theorist on the scene makes his pronouncement on how this is a communist plot. There is that brainwashing word again.

Who is brainwashed. Kids getting an education at school, or conspiracy theorists getting their worldview channeled through the FOX Republican channel.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:27 AM on 05/24/2011
Well put!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jimboy71
Hen Diapheron Heautoi
07:51 PM on 05/24/2011
Chris 1 isn't new.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
10:25 AM on 05/24/2011
There's the dopey song that goes "Papa oo-mow-mow" or whatever, but I'm pretty sure that's not what it's about.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClimateHawk
Think before posting.
12:13 AM on 05/24/2011
As a USA Today piece recently stated, climate change skeptics should be regarded in the same fashion as birthers, "a vocal minority that refuses to accept overwhelming evidence."

... and getting more shrill as the very real damage piles up.

We need to adopt clean energy now.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
08:07 AM on 05/24/2011
They're making our economy uncompetitive against communist China, and they still don't get it. There really is nothing to do with folks who refuse to be reasoned with but point and laugh.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dardedar
Not here to play patty cake...
10:49 AM on 05/24/2011
Here is a short video clip of republican (93% conservative rating) making your point:

http://climatecrocks.com/2010/11/19/the-last-rational-republican/

Excerpt:

"Your child is sick. 98 doctors say treat him this way. Two say no, this other way is the way to go. I’ll go with the two. You’re taking a big risk with those kids. Because 98 of the doctors say, “Do this thing,” two say, “Do the other.” So, it’s on the record.

And we’re here with important decision to be made. And I would also suggest to my Free Enterprise colleagues — especially conservatives here — whether you think it’s all a bunch of hooey, what we’ve talked about in this committee, the Chinese don’t. And they plan on eating our lunch in this next century. They plan on innovating around these problems, and selling to us, and the rest of the world, the technology that’ll lead the 21st century. So we may just press the pause button here for several years, but China is pressing the fast-forward button. And as a result, if we wake up in several years and we say, “geez, this didn’t work very well for us. The two doctors didn’t turn out to be so right. 98 might have been the ones to listen to.” Then what we’ll find is we’re way behind those Chinese folks."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
troutster
Fish fear me. Otherwise, I'm pretty harmless.
08:36 AM on 05/24/2011
Yeah. It's birthers - denying even in the face of evidence; evolution skeptics - denying even though every biologist who isn't bought knows better; climate change deniers - same thing - every scientist who isn't bought knows better; stem cell research antagonists - we can't allow scientists to cure disease cuz it will end the life of something that isn't alive. Clearly there is a war being waged against science by the right. But it fits philosophically with the Christian mantra: we walk by faith, not by sight. In other words, my mind is made up; don't confuse me with facts.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
09:49 AM on 05/24/2011
Science says that the embryo is a distinct human being with it's own "Human" DNA.
Science says that an embryo can nurish itself as well as a 6 day old or a 6 month old.
Science says that an embryo reads instructions built into it's DNA and on it's own constructs a place to live and an apparatus to breathe under water.
Someone with one of these embryos says, "it is part of my body, I can kill it if I wish" And the Congregation says, "Amen."
Now science says that there is survival of the fittest.
So, there is nothing wrong with killing that which is an impediment to one's survival or well being.
So, calling someone a birther or an evolution skeptic is a religious statement. There is supposedly Separation of Church and State. Making moral or ethical statements about your opponent is religious in nature and not scientific. Stick with the facts, Ma'am. I have no opinion either way. Prove to me with science, without your religious chatter, one way or the other.