As the year ends, our most poignant national sorrow pertains to gun violence in Connecticut, but 2012 also witnessed unrelenting violence from the forces of nature.

A historically mild winter was followed by record heat, drought and wildfires. October brought Superstorm Sandy and record property devastation to the highly populated Northeast.

Such impacts have been predicted for years by an overwhelming majority of credible scientists who point to evidence of man-made climate change, yet global warming remains a topic litigated in an unending political loop.

The far right dominates the world of “climate change denial,” which Wikipedia defines as: “A set of organized attempts to downplay, deny or dismiss the scientific consensus on the extent of global warming, its significance, and its connection to human behavior, especially for commercial or ideological reasons.”

You don’t even need to leave the state to find one of the nation’s leading practitioners. In a PBS “Frontline” program titled “Climate of Doubt” that aired in October, U.S. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Menomonee Falls, argued that scientists have failed to convince Congress about global warming.

Which brings me to Casey Meehan, born in Janesville and educated at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. For six years, Meehan taught high school psychology and history in the Janesville and Monona Grove school districts before returning to UW-Madison to pursue a Ph.D. in education.

Meehan has just finished his dissertation on how climate change is taught in Wisconsin schools. You might not be surprised by his conclusion: Unlike most subjects on which there is scientific consensus, with climate change the human role typically is taught as an open question.

Meehan’s initial focus upon returning to school was environmental education, but he says he noticed that not much had been written about the teaching of climate change.

“I started thinking more about how climate change is such an ideologically polarizing topic, and I was just curious about how schools were dealing with that,” he told me in an interview. “How are they teaching this topic that the public thinks a range of things about, but scientists think something very specifically about?”

Meehan did find some teaching material that “conceptualizes global warming very much as scientists do, that global warming is definitely happening, that it’s caused by human activity, that it’s a real problem we’re going to have to address.”

But, he adds: “On the other side there are some curricula that conceptualize global warming in a very different way: Global warming, while it might be happening, is not caused by human activity, and that there’s really no real scientific consensus around this issue at all.”

Meehan says he was interested in exploring how courses in science and social studies differed on the topic. He expected science classes would generally embrace consensus around the science more than social studies.

“I found that’s not necessarily true,” he says. “I found some social studies and some science curricula that treat global warming just as climate science experts would want it to be treated, meaning that it’s a problem that needs to be dealt with and is caused by humans.

“And then there are some social studies and science materials that treat global warming as a much more open question. That was one of the more surprising things I found.”

Another finding, he says, is that the instruction emphasized “mitigation” strategies on global warming, tactics to prevent release of carbon into the air. Less emphasis, he says, is focused on “adaptation” and “geo-engineering” approaches.

An adaptation approach would have students acknowledge that “climate change is happening and we’re not going to stop it.” He adds: “What do we need to do in society to prepare for these imminent changes?”

Some examples of adaptation teaching are evident since Superstorm Sandy, he says, in discussion of higher sea walls and new subway tunnel engineering for New York City.

At the extreme is geo-engineering, he says, which is the notion of climate experiments on a global scale. “These are some of the wacky things that you hear, like we could cover glaciers with essentially like a tinfoil layer to reflect sun and keep them from melting.

“I personally don’t agree with those. It’s sort of the same hubris that got us into this mess, that we can somehow control nature,” he says, adding, “But I still think it’s a good thing to have students thinking about these things” so they learn to reason through policy in a democratic way.

For his dissertation, Meehan analyzed curricula and interviewed social studies and science teachers in Wisconsin about how they teach global warming.

“I think probably the most interesting to me, was that the stance the teacher takes in their classroom doesn’t always match what they personally believe,” Meehan says.

“There are a few teachers I talked to who believe very strongly that global warming is caused by humans, and that it’s a serious problem, and one that needs our attention. However, they taught it as a much more open question to their kids, as far as letting students come away with their own understanding of what’s causing global warming and whether or not it’s a problem,” Meehan adds.

Why?

“Just from what I learned from these teachers, I have a few ideas. Some of them were concerned basically about challenges from either the administration or parents. One teacher that I spoke with taught the child of a school board member and the school board member confronted the teacher.”

He adds: “This is a science teacher saying that global warming is happening, it’s caused by humans, and the school board member actually stepped in and said, ‘No, you need to teach this as an open question,’ and the teacher begrudgingly complied.”

On the flip side, Meehan says he interviewed teachers who do not believe that climate change is caused by humans, but taught it as an open question so students would decide for themselves.

Some teachers “have very strong beliefs that students need to make up their own mind and so one of their core professional beliefs is that they’ll provide information for students and then let them decide.”

In the last chapter of his dissertation Meehan recommends that standards be set for teaching about climate change.

“Some of the supplemental materials and nearly all social studies and science textbooks portray global warming as something different than what experts in climate science have come to believe is true,” he concludes. “This is unacceptable if we are serious about preparing youth to deal with the challenges they will encounter.”

In a year-end article on the Salon website recounting the litany of severe climate events over the past two years, Michael Mann, a Penn State climate scientist, looked ahead: “What we view today as unprecedented extreme weather will become the new normal … if we proceed with business-as-usual.”

Yet climate change deniers continue to prevail by obfuscating and redirecting facts to indefinitely postpone serious debate.

Cynical, maybe, but it seems to be working.

Paul Fanlund is editor and executive publisher of The Capital Times. A longtime Madisonian, he was a State Journal reporter and editor before becoming a vice president of Madison Newspapers. He joined the Cap Times in 2006.

You might also like

(54) comments

koala
koala

Note to editors: sure would be nice to allow readers to post images here, as with Facebook. One picture = 1000 words. One graph would go a long way toward quieting chowderheads. Why a graph wasn't published with Fanlund's essay isn't obvious. But given the oversight, it would be nice to remedy it.

196ski
196ski

koala, no offense but so what?

Despite what ever the "truth" is we will put more greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere this year than last year and that is not going to stop for a long time. It's a big world and it is becoming industrialized. More power, more people, more greenhouse gas emissions.

It is just a fact that there is nothing we can do to stop it unless, as I mentioned below, we are willing as a planet to take steps that we both know we will never take. I did forget the one source of energy we could exploit and actually reduce fossil fuels and that is nuclear energy. Are you on board with that?

Improve efficiencies, that just makes good sense regardless of climate change, continue to invest in research and then adapt to a changing planet. Politically we certainly can't adapt well. New Orleans is a city built below sea level and in the path of hurricanes. It gets drowned by Katrina and what do we do? We rebuild it. Billions of taxpayer dollars spent to rebuild a city that is still below sea level, just waiting for the next hurricane. Genius.

koala
koala

OK, it's official, 2012 was the warmest year on record in Madison and Milwaukee – see http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/you-guessed-it-we-had-record-warmth-l187hqs-185339811.html .

If you feel compelled to say, well, that's only one year, then I would encourage you to download the data on the average annual temperatures in Madison since 1975, put them in Excel, graph them against time, and fit the regression line. The Upper Midwest continues to show the greatest rate of warming of any region in the US except Alaska. Those are the facts. The willfully ignorant can, of course, now go back to sleep (if they were ever awake in the first place).

Cornelius Gotchberg
Cornelius Gotchberg

OK; it's official: NASA/GISS has been caught tampering with temperature records...AGAIN!

http://notrickszone.com/2012/03/01/data-tamperin-giss-caught-red-handed-manipulaing-data-to-produce-arctic-climate-history-revision/

OK: it's official; they aren't alone...not by a darn site!

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/08/08/ncdc-tampers-with-july-data-for-global-warming-propaganda-purposes/

Even the criminal Met Office has 'quietly agreed' there has been no warming in 16 years. The criminal UNIPCC, in their leaked AR5, has backed off in a very timid manner. The true believers are the last to let go. They're kinda like bitter clingers, wouldn't you agree?

Too what do you most ascribe your stunning cluelessness most? The weapons grade tin foil lining your brainpan or the climate KoolAid drip to which you are tethered.

People might be more willing to engage you in intelligent discussion if you didn't bury your head so deeply in the sand, or your nether regions, trying to avoid dealing with the fraud and criminality. Talk about deniers!!!

The Gotch

Shake
Shake

Dude, you can't back up your arguments by citing climate change denier web sites and squirrels.

"Steven Goddard” is a pseudonym used by an anonymous climate denialist crank, so incredibly sloppy that he even embarrassed arch climate denier Anthony Watts"

pete
pete

"It was so cold up in the northern part of the state this morning, I actually saw liberals walking around with their hands in their own pockets..." (jason lewis)

jd33
jd33

Mr. Harding,

It must be a great burden for you to be so much more smarter and stuff then the rest of us gomers! I hope you don't become all frustrated and angry and stuff. Have you been able to find anyone who is smart enough to mate with yet or have you evolved passed the need to procreate?

Cornelius Gotchberg
Cornelius Gotchberg

@Warren G.Harding;

While I must confess I didn't vote for you, nor would I have. But as a fan of Boardwalk Empire, which, truth be told, depicted you in a less-than-flatterring light, I'm willing to cut you some slack.

Paleoclimatological charts depicting glacial and inter-glacial periods over the last couple of 100,000,000 years honestly look like an EKG.; to me leastways. Mother Gaia has a pulse!

Oddly enough, the gent that posited the Mother Gaia theory, and that would be one Dr. James Lovelock, has had what one may refer to as a 'change of heart;' an epiphany, if you will.

Atmospheric concentration of CO2? it's known to follow, or lag, periods of warming by ~800 years rather than be the result of warming. Now I do realize that particular time lag lines up curiously with the MWP that Dr. Michael Mann-made Global Warming so judiciously tried to airbrush out of his hilariously flawed "Hockey Stick" Theory.

If that's not enough: "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period." U/AZ Professor and IPCC lead author Jonothan Overpeck (in an uncharacteristically candid email to a colleague he believed was 'on board.')

And here I thought feeling warm was a good thing. Shoot; I'm starting to think I may not get 40,000 miles on that new set of hemp radials I got for my Toyota Pious.

It gets worse; in this era of hyper-climate-change-vigilance there are known sites that register + 1000 ppm CO2. They're called, and this is where it gets good...GREEN HOUSES. No; not those horribly overprised LEED homes youse Lefties get guilted into buying as emotionally satisfying purchases.

Plants love it, but what do they know.

"A consensus means that everyone agrees collectively what no one believes individually." A. Eban

196ski
196ski

It is irrelevant whether you believe in climate change or you do not. I happen to believe that it would be foolish to think that we can dump trillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and not have an effect. But at the end of the day it hardly matters what any of us think.

The hard cold truth is that every day humans are putting more and more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere and there isn't a single thing we can do about it. We close a dozen coal plants in the US and China and India build 1200. 1200 freaking new coal fired power plants. A major US export going forward? Coal. We can't burn it but we can sell it and the world wants it. Thank goodness we don't all share the atmosphere on this planet or this would be a sure sign of the idocracy taking over.

The planet saving Kyoto agreement? No country ever met the targets and it expired at midnight tonight. What is going to take its place? Nothing. Developing nations said cuts in greenhouse gas emissions should be limited to existing industrialized nations, developing nations like China and India needed their chance at unlimited gas emissions to "catch up".

The population is expanding and the worlds standard of living is improving. Demand for energy is up and their is no end in sight. Bottom line, it makes no difference what we do in the US if global warming is real, it is just something we are going to have to adapt to.

Real solutions? Hint, not windmills or solar panels.
Population control.
Decreased standards of living.
Hunter-gatherer mode.

The chance that any of the above will happen? Zero. Any chance the above would be taught in schools? Less than zero.

Happy New Year!


RichardSRussell
RichardSRussell

Short course in climatology:

Climate is what you expect; weather is what you get.

Obligatory sports analogy:

The fumble is not the football game; the game is not the season.

Coinneach
Coinneach

Yankee Bubba has changed his handle, but not his talking points. I won't engage "the Gotch" in this forum because I've gone down that road before and he is most definitely not here to debate anything in good faith.

Cornelius Gotchberg
Cornelius Gotchberg

@Coinneach;

What on Allah's Green earth are you talking about?

The Gotch

RichardSRussell
RichardSRussell

Global-warming deniers are amateurs compared to the long-running efforts of the evolution deniers, most of whose tactics have been imported wholesale into the crusade against science currently being encouraged and funded by the fossil-fuel industry and its sycophantic lackeys.

Cheezer
Cheezer

-3 up here in the great white north tonite. If you have any warming - global or otherwise - please send north of looneyville.

Cornelius Gotchberg
Cornelius Gotchberg

@RichardSRussell;

I've had the undeniably distinct pleasure of auditing your ersatz brilliance from afar and am a huge fan.

As you're without question a self-made man that worships his Creator, not unlike, it would appear, @Coinneach, I humbly request a ruling.

Thomas Huxley: (Scientist, humanist, prominent defender of Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution, critic of organized religion and credited with the origin of the words "agnostic" & "agnosticism.")

Quoth he: "Skepticism is the highest of duties; blind faith the one unpardonable sin."

Where might he have weighed in on 'the science is settled' and 'the debate is over?'

The Gotch

RichardSRussell
RichardSRussell

An admirable position on Huxley's part. I would expect him to be entirely consistent and say, as all responsible scientists do, that NO question in science is ever decided permanently; there are no conclusions; there are only beliefs held tentatively, and they're all subject to revision as more evidence comes rolling in.

I will add a follow-up observation on the same topic from a respected observer of the process: "When people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." —Isaac Asimov (1920-1992), American science-fiction writer

koala
koala

Indeed, the very essence of science is that nothing is ever permanently settled. Everything is subject to further test and confirmation.

But if that means you don't have to believe me that if you walk out an open window on the 20th floor you'll fall to your death, then by all means defy scientific consensus and walk out that window.

The difference between personal obstinacy/idiocy/delusion of this persuasion and climate-change denial is that, in the latter, if you're intent on walking out that window, there's a fair chance you will take several of us (and our fellow inhabitants on the planet) with you.

Cornelius Gotchberg
Cornelius Gotchberg

News flash to Fanlund & the rest of the Global Warming true believers; there hasn't been any Global Warming in the last 16 years.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html

The Met (of Climate Gate I & II fame) released this report 'very quietly.' Why, you ask? It's going to stymie the funding for a scam that's dying on the vine. Gotta admit, this one had promise; a Statist's absolute wet-dream. Scams die hard, but when they do, no one wants to be near the corpse.

I know, I know, the CHOSEN ONE has breathlessly claimed that climate change will be his 3rd highest priorities. Of course, he said he was going to repeal the Patriot Act, make us much loved worldwide, usher in a 'post-racial' America, and turn the economy around in three years or this would be a one term proposition. Reckon he meant well, but must have confused teleprompted platitudes with measureable results. Also, he hasn't mentioned it in the last two SOTU speeches; probably slipped his mind with blaming everything on Bush and somesuch.

Dr. Phil Jones ((HadCrut, ClimateGate email deleter, etc.) "We don't fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don't fully understand it you could say tha *natural variability* is now working to suppress the warming. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT NATURAL VARIABILITY IS DOING." (emphasis mine) WTF??? We should shrink our economy back to pre-civil war levels and the Rock Star doesn't know what's going on?

Jones insisted recently that 15 to 16 years is NOT a significant period-pauses in warming of such length have always been expected. One of the ClimateGate emails he forgot to delete, when the 'plateau' (or lack of global warming to the uninitiated) was becoming evident in 2009: "Bottom line: the 'no upward trend' has to CONTINUE FOR A TOTAL OF 15 YEARS BEFORE WE GET CONCERNED." (emphasis mine and a flip-flop John Kerry would be proud of)

Before WE GET CONCERNED??? Concerned about what? The fact that their life's work chasing the Brass Ring of Global Warming and the 10's of billion$ that have been thrown at it has been a catastrophic wasted failure? Wouldn't anyone that could fog a mirror be happy that we aren't being warmed to death?

It's not as though they haven't been enabled. A little flip chart shows how NASA/GISS has been rewriting temperature history to make the past seem cooler in order to make today appear warmer.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/11/18/nasa-rewriting-us-history/

Lord knows I could keep chronicling the absolute tsunami of data manipulation, scientific fraud, and horrendously sloppy research til I wore my fingers to a nub. In 2007, NASA/GISS releases a spittle-flecked report that that year's October in Russia was the warmest ever recorded. A couple of independent researchers discovered with little difficulty whatsoever that the taxpayer-funded morons at NASA/GISS advertently used September's data and cataloged it as October. NASA/GISS admitted that it HAD NO QUALITY CONTROL OVER THE NUMBERS IT USES FOR ITS ANALYSIS!

My question for the true believers; how come you never try to explain this or even open it up for discussion?

Dr. KevinTrenberth (The Met, HadCrut, The EAU, ClimateGate email deleter, etc.): "The fact that we can't ACCOUNT FOR THE LACK OF WARMING at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

Hey Kevin; you want a real travesty? Wait for the investigations of all the scientific, academic, and ethical malfeasance, some of which are now occurring. Failure to comply with FOIA request is a felony, as is federal grant fraud and conspiracy to commit same.

Wait til some of these guys get a whiff of doing some real time. Think they'll still be circling the wagons with the tribal culture they used to explain away ClimateGate? The music's stopping and no one's even going to be looking for a seat. They'll be too busy trying to cover their @$$e$!

The Gotch

number6
number6

Let's say the planet has been here for millions of years. Not something I can prove, of course. For roughly the last 250 years we have been depositing increasing amounts of combustion gases into the atmosphere, in quantities which probably (??) did not occur 'naturally' prior to that. It is unreasonable to expect this could change things? And from what previous experiences would the planet's natural systems have evolved coping mechanisms? ('Kill the offending lifeform,' I guess, might do the job.)

Cheezer
Cheezer

C'mon Madison

The best laugh so far is Banana's "the earth is a bubble". Surely you can entertain us with better "the sky is falling" antics!!!!!

Comment deleted.
Cheezer
Cheezer

Hankdog

That's it?! No heartfelt overly emotional dire warnings of the earth's demise? I had hoped for more entertainment from you!

Coinneach
Coinneach

The ignorant deniers are out in force today. Lovers of reason, do not despair! Poll after poll shows these kooks are no more than 10% of the population, no matter how numerous they may seem on newspaper comment boards, resplendent in their aluminum foil head coverings.

Sadly, they are over-represented politically because of the massive funding by certain corporate backers.

Cornelius Gotchberg
Cornelius Gotchberg

@Coinneach;

Generally when ad hom attacks replace rational discourse it's because the self-anointed noblesse oblige have nowhere else to go. I find it rather amusing in a pitiable sort of way.

Lovers of reason? you have to be freaking kidding! Reasonable people (those I presume love reason) discuss main points in an open forum.

Explain why Fat Albert refuses to do just that. Explain why the rock stars of Climate Science steadfastly refuse to make their data sets and methodologies available to independent review. The burden of proof is on the proposer not on the skeptic. The greatest advances in science have come when researchers have broken from consensus rather than by being handcuffed by it.

Do recall at one time the 'consensus' of existence was 'geocentric.' Galileo had the audacity to challenge the Church's view of things, proposing a tthe theory of 'heliocentrism.' He was placed under house arrest for a protracted period of time for his heresy. His protege', Giovanni Bruno didn't fair quite as well; he was burned the stake in a pitch shirt, undoubtedly contributing to the Global Warming.

Recall earlier this year when those CERN researchers believed they'd overturned the Theory of Relativity with the neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light ? The very first thing they did was turn their results over to independent review. What have the Climate Researchers done? Hit the delete button ahead of FOIA inquiry. Does that not even resonate with you?

Perhaps the back of the cereal box from which you've apparently drawn your conclusions failed to cover that. I realize Fat albert made a schlockumentary that scared a lot of children. The junk science it pushes forced the U.K. (certainly no bastion of conservatism when it comes to education) to not allow it to be shown without 9 disclaimers.

Massive funding? you some sort of comic? In the U.S. alone, we fund a science that's supposed to be 'settled' with north of $6 Billion per year. Over $70 Billion since 2008. We spend less on the NIH and cancer research. Did I mention the 10's of billion$ flowing from the ENGO's, the UNIPCC (funded mostly by the U.S.), the huge Lefty foundations (Ford, Joyce, Bulllitt, Rockefeller, etc.)? Then there's the the Lefty corporation like GE, that great American enterprise. Even though it pays hardly any U.S. taxes and makes nothing in the U.S. anymore, it still has its insatiable maw affixed firmly to Uncle Sam's teat being nourished with the fat-enriched 'Green' susidies.

"Green:" that concept that makes all you Lefities buckle and swoon and helped the CHOSEN ONE throw billions away in the last couple of years alone.

I've noticed with others of your comments (regarding people of faith particularly) and intolerance doesn't begin to describe them. Are your opinions that unimpeachable that you consider any opposition to your worldview to be so troublesome that it requires they not only be silenced but deserve abject mockery as well?

Smart people, like the Rock Stars of Climate Science, at the highest levels of any field have the lowest exposure to those with differing or conflicting points of view. That is the very antithesis of scientific inquiry.

It's a pity many refuse to acknowledge that.

The Gotch

pete
pete

This stuff becomes laughable at times. There is a guy that sits (or used to) on a board of a company that was going to be responsible for selling/trading carbon offsets for manufacturers. He also is a venture capitalist of many "green" companies which get massive subsidies, tax credits, etc from the federal gov't. He could likely become the first global warming billionaire....his name, Al Gore.

bananasplitz said: "Apparently you don't remember the hottest year on record, which happens to be 2012. Do you not remember this summer's intense heat that went on for weeks?"

Really?? It's supposed to be really cold tonight, what does that mean?


Madravenspeak
Madravenspeak

It means that global climate chaos will be a rapid warming with periods of extremes in all directions - extreme heat dominating, but extreme drought, winds, cold, - MORE EXTREME WEATHER. Really? You just don't get it?

IAD
IAD

The problem with this whole issue is the climate change apologists in so many ways are easily the most annoying people on the planet. They range from the inventor of the internet (the laughable Al G.) to loud mouth activists who have many other "issues" they are screaming about besides climate change. Because of those other issues, many people tune the screamers out as people with big mouths and small brains. Unfortunately some of the scientists who actually may know something about CC fall into the incredibly "annoying" category as well. All that being said, of course the earth seems to be warming--- like it has in cycles for zillions of years before any person started burning coal or natural gas or anything else.

Madravenspeak
Madravenspeak

Irrelevant that we have had normal cycles. THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT HUMANS ARE WARMING THE PLANET. NONE. So natural cycles may come and go over millions of years - but we know, scientifically, that the industrial age has upped the CO2 content - the methane content ( 300 times as potent in climate warming) from 55 billion livestock being raised on the planet for human disease, obesity and gluttony - all these things reflect human excesses. We know that as we continue to abuse planet earth, the oceans are acidifying and rising such that coral reefs are extinguishing. Since the shallow coastal areas and the coral reefs depend on a narrow life-giving temperature and acidity range, we can predict that dead oceans - will predict a much diminished human ability to survive on planet earth. DUH!

Beingbucky
Beingbucky

40 bird species in the Midwest have moved north, I rarely saw turkey buzzards here as a kid; only when I visited Texas. Now they are common. So, the birds read the Huff Post? Sure, and God put all those fossils there to test our faith,

Johnnykid67
Johnnykid67

All a free thinking person needs to know are what the answers are to reverse man made global warming to realize its a hoax

jon
jon


Classic leftist propaganda. Silence those who point out the deceit in your indoctrination campaign---ignore and ridicule anyone exposing your faked data and organized suppression of honest scientific debate.

"sifting and winnowing" all the data , all the theories, and looking at climate history over centuries instead of decades can't be allowed. Our kids might grow up to question academic authority. Standardize that curriculum!

Dode
Dode

Glowbull warming is nothing BUT politics - a bunch of environuts trying to push their agenda on the rest of us. The faulty data the IPCC used to create this hysteria is the reason this malarkey should be ignored in the schools. The best lesson that kids could learn from this is an old one: liars figure and figures lie.

Sandy had nothing to do with warming. Ask the folks who were being frozen out in their wrecked homes.

Warren G Harding
Warren G Harding

Most of these so-called "scientists" are libruls who've never worked an honest day in their pitiful lives. CO2 is "invisible" they say. It doesn't even exist is more like it. When decent Americans burn wood, oil, grease (in meats, cheeses and bacons), leaves, old shirts, or anything else, smoke is the product. The scientists are liars. Libruls are liars. The vegans, welfare queens and union thugs are in with them, too. FOX news has proved this again and again like when they put a global warming book in a snow bank, but the liars are so hateful of our Godly empire they ignore all factual observable reality. Big Jim Sennsenbrenner stood up for Lance Armstrong when the libruls concocted a "doping" scandal against him and stopped the libruls at the DOJ from their anti-Republican witchhunt against Lance. Big Jim Sennsenbrenner should fire these librul "scientists" and send them out to Wal-Mart to work a real job for a change.

MAGRN
MAGRN

OMG is this a serious post?

koala
koala

No, but Dode and jon are serious in their posts. Unfortunately, they are seriously (a) ignorant and/or (b) deluded. And most certainly (c) unconvinceable by logic or facts.

Madravenspeak
Madravenspeak

You have got to be nuts!

Madravenspeak
Madravenspeak

Fire Sensenbrenner - he is an embarrasment as is the DEAD Harding. It is so embarrassing that Wisconsin is creating such dumbed down Republithugs.

RichardSRussell
RichardSRussell

For the latecomers, "Warren G. Harding" and "Tea Parody" habitually write exaggerated versions of right-wing talking points, much as Stephen Colbert parodies right-wing pundits on The Colbert Report. Unfortunately, if they do it too well, they run head-on smack into the dilemma of Poe's Law: Any sufficiently accurate parody is indistinguishable from the real thing.

Warren G Harding
Warren G Harding

Possibly Warren G. Harding or Tea Parody would be faint clues to GomerAmerica as would be the writers' reasonably good facility with punctuation and sentence structure that the writers are pulling some legs. I've heard some Republicans believed Colbert was one of their own until someone told them he was mocking them. I used to have a t-shirt that said "Jesus votes Republican" and one look at me would give someone with analytic skills beyond simple active declarative sentences the idea that it's a joke, but the true believers with their far-away eyes couldn't figure it out. They don't get satire, parody, plays on words and are not usually very good at math or chemistry, either, but they've been winning lately.

Rosalie
Rosalie

Seven billion humans on the planet with their constant alterations of ecosystems worldwide is of course altering the environment. It is stupid and folly to think otherwise.

BananaSplitz
BananaSplitz

Sssshhh Rosalie--we don't want to be disturbed by your diversion into reasonable discourse.

BananaSplitz
BananaSplitz

Don't worry about adapting, we already do. Our summers will be spent hovering around the air conditioners. Coastal homes can put themselves on stilts to deal with repeating flooding. Islands going underwater, well, those people can go live elsewhere.

LifelongBadger
LifelongBadger

Once again Paul Fandland produces an article to fit the progressive beliefs of Madison. He even invokes Michael Mann without mentioning the fraudulent nature of his research. (http://www.globalclimatescam.com/category/michael-mann/ ).
The only conclusion I can draw about Mr. Meehan's dissertation is that at the present time some Wisconsin schools are teaching global warming in an open format that allows students to weigh the evidence. Oh my gosh, can it be that things are being done in an open manner? As with most progressive thought, that doesn't square with the fact that THEY know best and therefore should dictate the manner in which something is taught.
There is a legitimate school of thought in the scientific community that yes global warming does exist but man's contributions are infinitesimal and irrelevant. That always receives short shrift from the left. They don't seem to understand that science is not consensus driven but reproducible evidence driven. Climate models used to defend the position of anthropogenic global warming are flawed. Until that is fixed, global warming should be taught as an open question. For Mr. Meehan to call for "standards" of teaching global warming is misplaced.

koala
koala

As a scientist, I strongly disagree with your statement that "There is a legitimate school of thought in the scientific community that yes global warming does exist but man's contributions are infinitesimal and irrelevant", and your assertion that arguments to the contrary are politically motivated.

Lifey, you should consider whether climate-change denial is politically motivated. All the evidence is that it is. It is largely funded by power utilities and fossil fuel companies and their billionaire owners, and is carried forward by the right wing of the GOP. Might consider what that means as you drink your next glass of the Kool Aid.

Madravenspeak
Madravenspeak

Ah - what a relief to have sanity in the comment section, oft dominated by Republithug products of right wing propaganda. These people really should read "What's the Matter With Kansas" and apply it to Wisconsin.

Cheezer
Cheezer

From Euronews

"Russia is in the icy grip of its coldest December on record! "

Paul, I believe you fall into "fool some of the people all of the time" category!

BananaSplitz
BananaSplitz

The climate is changing. It means hotter hots, colder colds. Apparently you don't remember the hottest year on record, which happens to be 2012. Do you not remember this summer's intense heat that went on for weeks?

Would you sit in your garage with the door closed and the car running and expect to live? The earth is a bubble. Our idling cars and burning coal residue don't just disappear into the sky under a barrage of rainbows and unicorns. It stays trapped there and takes a long time to eventually degrade.

hankdog
hankdog

cheez:

Which category do fall in ; gross stupidity or willful ignorance ?

hankdog
hankdog

cheez: Sorry for the typo. It should have said "Which category do you fall in"'.

Which, please?

MAGRN
MAGRN

What does one summer, one winter, or one storm have to do with global warming? I guess most of you were "raised up" on those text books from Texas. Dinasauers ate part of that apple along with Eve don'tchaknow? Contrary to faux snooze belief an "insert head into sand" ideology will affect your grandchildren and their grandchildren. Global warming is happening. It is not "just a cycle" and it is not just one hot dust bowl type summer, nor just one hurricane nor one cold Russian winter. Unfortunately mankind is depending on US, and if US is the bunch responding here, we are in deep hot fecal matter.

Madravenspeak
Madravenspeak

WEATHER EXTREMES. Not just overall global warming which is a fact. More wind, more extreme cold, hot and dry. MORE EXTREMES. Do you read? Or just sit eating cheez whits in front of Fox News and their billionaire oil magnate propaganda?

TheBorg
TheBorg

"Science Under Attack" is also a great program about those who deny science.

RecessionSux
RecessionSux

Having Al Gore as the non scientist spokesman for global warming was not a good thing.

MAGRN
MAGRN

I kind of agree with you. I can handle numbers and facts, and many of us can. Ok, maybe not the group responding to this article, but anyway I think that generalizations and conjecture was not a good way to present the whole thing.

Warren G Harding
Warren G Harding

In 1840 there was about 290 ppm CO2. We are up around 380 ppm now. You put temperatures on log paper and the last few decades' spike is pretty obvious. Earth may have been on a gradual warming trend since the last ice age about 15,000 years ago, but the spike does not follow that curve at all. Of course, none of any of this has any effect on GomerAmerica. They don't even understand simple arithmetic averages so I don't bother with trying to convince them of anything. I just mock them and they don't get that, either.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. Exchange ideas and opinions on posted articles. Don't promote products or services, impersonate other site users, register multiple accounts, threaten or harass others, post vulgar, abusive, obscene or sexually oriented language. Don't post content that defames or degrades anyone. Don't repost copyrighted material; link to it. In other words, stick to the topic and play nice. Report abuses by clicking the button. Users who break the rules will be banned from commenting. We no longer issue warnings. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.