Print
Wash. school board restricts Gore's global-warming film
by The Associated Press
Reposted from:
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=18001
Admin note: This story is similar to the one posted last week, but with some additional information.
FEDERAL WAY, Wash. — The school board in this suburb south of Seattle has restricted showings of Al Gore's movie on global warming, including requiring that it be balanced with an adequate opposing viewpoint.
The board also required Superintendent Tom Murphy to approve when the former vice president's film, "An Inconvenient Truth," can be presented.
The decision was sparked by complaints from parents who said their children were taking the film as fact after viewing it at school.
"Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher," said Frosty Hardison, a parent of seven children who doesn't want the film shown at all.
"The information that's being presented is a very cockeyed view of what the truth is," Hardison told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. "The Bible says that in the end times everything will burn up, but that perspective isn't in the DVD."
Board President Ed Barney told The News Tribune of Tacoma on Jan. 10 that he had received about a half-dozen complaints from parents.
"We have to ensure that our schools are not being used to politically indoctrinate anyone," said board member Dave Larson, who with Barney and board member Charlie Hoff voted Jan. 9 for the requirements.
None of the board members has seen the movie. District policy, however, requires that an opposing view be aired whenever a controversial issue is examined in school.
"I am shocked that a school district would come to this decision," the movie's co-producer, Laurie David, said in a statement. "There is no opposing view to science, which is fact, and the facts are clear that global warming is here, now."
Gore's documentary has received approval from some of the nation's top climate scientists for its accuracy. In it, he presents scientists' findings on the catastrophic dangers of climate change.
Federal researchers with the National Academy of Sciences have said the planet's temperature has climbed to levels not seen in thousands of years, and has begun to affect plants and animals.
But Larson offered two opposing articles, including one by author John Stossel, that said many scientists discredit global-warming predictions. He also cited NASA and NOAA Web sites referring to debate and disagreement over climate change.
The film also has been denied a showing at Tacoma's Remann Hall, a high school for juvenile offenders, where Principal Rue Palmer rejected a teacher's request.
The film hasn't been approved by the Tacoma School District's curriculum committee. The school also focuses on core subjects and doesn't generally show films, said Patti Holmgren, Tacoma district spokeswoman.
The National Science Teachers Association turned down an offer from the film's producers for 50,000 free DVDs for classroom use. The association said it didn't want to be seen as politically endorsing the film or to open itself to requests from other special interests.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=18001
Admin note: This story is similar to the one posted last week, but with some additional information.
FEDERAL WAY, Wash. — The school board in this suburb south of Seattle has restricted showings of Al Gore's movie on global warming, including requiring that it be balanced with an adequate opposing viewpoint.
The board also required Superintendent Tom Murphy to approve when the former vice president's film, "An Inconvenient Truth," can be presented.
The decision was sparked by complaints from parents who said their children were taking the film as fact after viewing it at school.
"Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher," said Frosty Hardison, a parent of seven children who doesn't want the film shown at all.
"The information that's being presented is a very cockeyed view of what the truth is," Hardison told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. "The Bible says that in the end times everything will burn up, but that perspective isn't in the DVD."
Board President Ed Barney told The News Tribune of Tacoma on Jan. 10 that he had received about a half-dozen complaints from parents.
"We have to ensure that our schools are not being used to politically indoctrinate anyone," said board member Dave Larson, who with Barney and board member Charlie Hoff voted Jan. 9 for the requirements.
None of the board members has seen the movie. District policy, however, requires that an opposing view be aired whenever a controversial issue is examined in school.
"I am shocked that a school district would come to this decision," the movie's co-producer, Laurie David, said in a statement. "There is no opposing view to science, which is fact, and the facts are clear that global warming is here, now."
Gore's documentary has received approval from some of the nation's top climate scientists for its accuracy. In it, he presents scientists' findings on the catastrophic dangers of climate change.
Federal researchers with the National Academy of Sciences have said the planet's temperature has climbed to levels not seen in thousands of years, and has begun to affect plants and animals.
But Larson offered two opposing articles, including one by author John Stossel, that said many scientists discredit global-warming predictions. He also cited NASA and NOAA Web sites referring to debate and disagreement over climate change.
The film also has been denied a showing at Tacoma's Remann Hall, a high school for juvenile offenders, where Principal Rue Palmer rejected a teacher's request.
The film hasn't been approved by the Tacoma School District's curriculum committee. The school also focuses on core subjects and doesn't generally show films, said Patti Holmgren, Tacoma district spokeswoman.
The National Science Teachers Association turned down an offer from the film's producers for 50,000 free DVDs for classroom use. The association said it didn't want to be seen as politically endorsing the film or to open itself to requests from other special interests.
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Monday, January 15, 2007 | PermalinkComments 1 - 41 of 41 | | View Alternate Comment Thread
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #17698 by Dizzlski on January 15, 2007 at 3:02 pm
This article conveniently leaves out the belief of Frosty Hardison that the earth is 14,000 years old. The end times comment is ridiculous enough on it's own I suppose.Other Comments by Dizzlski
3. Comment #17699 by toomanytribbles on January 15, 2007 at 3:03 pm
it was frustrating last week, it's frustrating this week.this, however, is more encouraging:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16638277/
i don't know what they agreed on, but i'll be looking for news on wednesday.
Other Comments by toomanytribbles
4. Comment #17701 by JohnF on January 15, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Find sand, insert head. Other Comments by JohnF
5. Comment #17703 by Duncan1349 on January 15, 2007 at 3:10 pm
You can hardly be surprised what with George Bush's stance on global warming, as for Frosty Hardison, I suppose she would like all the Apocalyptic views that other religions take to be shown on the DVD, so that hers and others children will be fully informed? Or maybe she would like, as Dan Dennet proposes, teaching all the main religions equally and unbiased to children? Other Comments by Duncan1349
6. Comment #17707 by Arcturus on January 15, 2007 at 3:26 pm
How can we be balanced towards science? If a theory proves to be correct then it takes over. There is no democracy in science, the best theory wins, the rest go to the recycling bin. Global warming is a theory accepted by the overwhelming majority of scientits, so deal with it!I remember from "An inconvenient truth", the part where Al Gore shows the number of peer reviewed papers that contradict the global warming theory, they are almost inexistent. But when we look at newspaper articles and tv news then you have almost 50%. Unfortunately people will not read/understand a scientific paper, but will happily embrace what ever propaganda is shown on tv.
This has become too political. We cannot choose what science should tell us. We can argue about what is to be done about the consequences, but not too much on scientific truths if they are well estabilished.
Other Comments by Arcturus
7. Comment #17720 by Jack Rawlinson on January 15, 2007 at 4:47 pm
Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacherNice argument. Presumably this school doesn't use any materials - books, video, DVD, recorded sound... that isn't written or performed by qualified schoolteachers? Oh dear! I guess that would include the bible!
Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson
8. Comment #17723 by DrShell on January 15, 2007 at 5:38 pm
You know, I just finished watching the final sessions of the Beyond Belief conference, and I spent some time today pondering my own feelings about the argument between the attendees on whether the more aggressive stance of Dawkins and Harris is preferable to that of advocates of "tolerance" and "understanding" and so forth.This right here is where the kinder, gentler camp loses me. Dawkins talks about indoctrination of children as abusive--and I agree--but a more insidious problem, in my view, is the Christian drive, indeed the responsibility, from their perspective, of indoctrinating other people's children. All children. I cannot tolerate this.
I could go on and on about what I have faced with my own son since moving to Oklahoma. A short list includes: a teacher who provided sample ideas for her (public school) 3rd graders to copy for their "I am thankful for..." assignment and included "I am thankful for God's blessings"; an invitation to a guest night carnival at a local church, at which my then 6 year old, attending without his parents and as a guest not a member, was instructed to close his eyes and ask Jesus to come into his heart so he could "go see him after he died" after being plied with cotton candy and bounce houses all evening; and most recently, a Jack Chick tract about eternal damnation slipped by some vile coward into my little boy's plastic pumpkin during this year's neighborhood trick-or-treating.
I watched those BB videos, as some speakers called Harris and Dawkins "angry" as if that's automatically a bad thing. I don't think it is. I'm the biggest wuss you'll ever meet in many, many ways; I hate anger and conflict. But you bet your life I'm angry about this. These people aren't satisfied with telling their own children lies; they're coming after OUR children as well, and they want to use the schools to do it. They want to deny ALL children accurate science educations. It is absolutely untenable, and there is no room for tolerating it.
Other Comments by DrShell
9. Comment #17734 by EndlessForms on January 15, 2007 at 8:29 pm
*DrShell* - You have read my mind! A constant argument I get in with friends and family, is that perhaps I'm too aggressive/angry/rude towards religion.First off, I think stories like this show exactly why we should be angry.
Second, as soon as they enforce their delusions on OUR children, the only way to push them back is to be aggressive.
And third, the only reason Dawkins et al appear rude, is simply the fact that religious individuals aren't used to criticism, they're used to the unwarranted respect they've received for the last millennia. I bet if I'd told a mental patient who'd thought he was Napoleon, that all scientific evidence said that he WASN'T Napoleon, he'd think I was pretty rude!
Other Comments by EndlessForms
10. Comment #17746 by denoir on January 15, 2007 at 10:19 pm
DrShell:
I watched those BB videos, as some speakers called Harris and Dawkins "angry" as if that's automatically a bad thing. I don't think it is.
Unconditional tolerance is not a stable strategy. If you are ready to back down in every case, just not to get into a fight you will be run over by the ones that are intolerant.
Unconditional intolerance is not a stable strategy either as it is too destructive and takes too much energy - opening up for tolerance as a more efficient strategy.
If you take from nature and game theory, a stable strategy is defined by the so called "Retaliator" model. You are tolerant until somebody is intolerant of you - then you strike back with intolerance.
This strategy leads to a society where you are tolerant to most things, but not to intolerance.
Other Comments by denoir
11. Comment #17757 by Murslak on January 15, 2007 at 11:41 pm
How much longer do we have to deal with ignorance as pertains to public misunderstanding of science? As I understand, the scientific community has come to an agreement. Global warming is occuring whether uneducated people want to believe it or not! Since when have, personal, human beliefs influenced the actual happenings of our global systems? These uninformed educational boards across the country seem to think that global warming is open for discussion. Like we can take a vote and change the truth! Global warming is fact as far as science can place the title 'fact' on anything. There is an an over-abundance of ignorance in our world, and it is a shame that Americans are propagating this ignorance to the youth of the nation. Open your eyes people, we're slipping, and it is crap like this that will pull us down a dark road.I have never posted an online comment before, but I have to start somewhere. As long as crap like the AP article above shows up on my desktop, I may continue. Oh yeah, it is great to see a forum of this nature alive and well!!!
Other Comments by Murslak
12. Comment #17771 by Bongdoper on January 16, 2007 at 6:18 am
When I was in eighth grade (in 1972 in California), I had an English teacher who regularly spent a good deal of class time babbling about Jesus, and in general spewing us with a lot of his literal interpretations of the Bible. There was lots of fire-and-brimstone stuff thrown in, along with the usual Holy Spirit spookiness and, in general, a lot things that to me didn't make much sense.They still don't, but back then I was naive (and hopeful) enough to believe that things will get better, and someday we won't be coerced into believing this nonsense. In eighth grade, I probably would not have put it in so many words, but my deeper insticts were telling me that this teacher was full of s--t, and that he was abusing his position.
Flash forward to today... How wrong I was! America is even more ignorant and frightened and cajoled into spooky religions, but today I do not sit there like the meek 8th grader I was. I 'call' people on their nonsense, and I no longer care what sort of mixed company I'm in. when someone tries to infiltrate a conversation or topic with their code-talk of religion. I'm having none of it.
Just because we no longer burn witches does not mean that we will never burn them again, and with that in mind - more people need to speak up. Being firm is not the same thing as being rude.... thank you Richard Dawkins.
Other Comments by Bongdoper
13. Comment #17773 by madpatriot on January 16, 2007 at 6:46 am
Hey, I've got a new game we can play. The idea is to come up with sentences that are logically equivalent and equally nonsensical to this:Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher.
I'll start:
Nuclear weapons don't belong in the zoo, and neither does the train. It's not an animal.
Other Comments by madpatriot
14. Comment #17774 by Luthien on January 16, 2007 at 7:30 am
RE: Comment #17723 by DrShell on January 15, 2007 at 5:38 pm Well said DrShell!
RE: 13. Comment #17773 by madpatriot on January 16, 2007 at 6:46 am
"Hey, I've got a new game we can play. The idea is to come up with sentences that are logically equivalent and equally nonsensical to this:
Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher.
I'll start:
Nuclear weapons don't belong in the zoo, and neither does the train. It's not an animal. "
"Condoms don't belong in school" is a way of saying "I'm a Christian Fanatic", therefore what I say after this is 'morally' right.
Oh, and "Musical instruments don't belong on the moon, and neither do zombies, because everyone knows the moon is made of cheese"
Other Comments by Luthien
15. Comment #17776 by scot on January 16, 2007 at 8:05 am
The global warming bandwagon is beginning to resemble a religion. People look at you strange if you say you're not convinced. If it is unquestionable I still need to be pointed in the right direction to find the unbiased evidence that proves it. The global warming scare is a reason for higher taxes and fines. Some countries will require more taxes and fines to pay for their carbon credits when they fall short of meeting their KYOTO goals. I wonder what the evangelicals want for agreeing to cooperate with science to fight the problem? If I give them a donation am I being responsible? (see link from comment above)I'm not arguing that global warming doesn't exist or that the environment isn't important. I am considering the possibility of an agenda to scare people for alterior motives.Other Comments by scot
16. Comment #17778 by Logicel on January 16, 2007 at 9:11 am
madpatriot wrote, "Nuclear weapons don't belong in the zoo, and neither does the train. It's not an animal."_______
Underpants don't belong in a hospital, neither do hair brushes. They are not medical equipment.
Other Comments by Logicel
17. Comment #17779 by DrShell on January 16, 2007 at 9:30 am
I'm going to try to be objective for a moment and suggest that perhaps these people wouldn't have a problem with global warming being discussed in the school, per se, but they're worried about privileging Gore's perspective because he is a political (and politicized) figure?Yeah, the problem is easily solved by, like, watching the damn video, so...I don't know.
Other Comments by DrShell
18. Comment #17784 by Vadjong on January 16, 2007 at 11:16 am
Atheists don't belong in churches, neither does God. He never puts an alm in the poor box. (And He sings too loud.) Other Comments by Vadjong
19. Comment #17787 by Jack Rawlinson on January 16, 2007 at 11:39 am
scot: "The global warming bandwagon is beginning to resemble a religion"No, it isn't. Not if you look at it properly. Why? because unlike a religion it has masses of hard, scientific evidence to support it. And it really isn't hard to find at all. Watching the film would be a good start, you know.
Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson
20. Comment #17793 by jschwalm7 on January 16, 2007 at 1:10 pm
It is ironic that people who reject science ultimatley have influence on how it should be taught.Other Comments by jschwalm7
21. Comment #17797 by renzo_piano on January 16, 2007 at 3:45 pm
"The Bible says that in the end times everything will burn up, but that perspective isn't in the DVD."sure, that's what it is - a "perspective"
Other Comments by renzo_piano
22. Comment #17798 by NeoGothic on January 16, 2007 at 3:54 pm
FHardison wrote: "On something as simple as the age of the earth? I can do the math, the lineage provided in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38 that give the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Matthew recorded Joseph's lineage, while Luke gave the family tree of Mary) places us at what right about 12,000 years today? "What makes Frosty think that the bible can be cited as a reliable document for any information pertaining to the physical world? It was written by a bunch of old men who were uneducated by today's standards and thought the Earth was flat, over the course of several thousand years How you do verify the information in the bible? Can another person arrive at your conclusion by another method that doesn't include the bible? What about the Hindu Gita (their holy book)? It claims the Earth is far older than the date arrived at by study of the bible. And what of other religions? If we accept the claims of the bible and are honest enough to stick to the same standards of evidence we used on it, then we are forced to accept the truth of other, contradictory holy books. This goes along with the presumtion that faith (read: belief without evidence) is somehow a good thing and a valid method of knowing. The whole business is preposterous hogwash.
Other Comments by NeoGothic
23. Comment #17803 by Chayanov on January 16, 2007 at 4:41 pm
"Hey, I thought Jesus was the son of God, but according to FHardison, he's the son of Mary and ... Joseph! Thanks FHardison (and Matthew), for debunking that myth as well!"Yeah, I always wondered why anyone cared what the lineage of Joseph (God's Cuckold) was. He had nothing to do with any of this, really, except for having God knock up his wife.
Other Comments by Chayanov
24. Comment #17806 by EMD on January 16, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Living here in Washington State, USA, near Federal Way Public Schools, I emailed the president of the board and here is his response:"Thank you for taking the time to contact the Board. The decision was not
to ban or censure the movie. The question that faced the Board was whether
or not District policy was followed with regard to the use of said movie.
The Board has requested that Superintendent Murphy investigate the issue
and return to the Board on the 23rd to report his finding and suggest, if
any, what changes or corrective steps need to be taken.
There is some controversy surrounding the movie within the scientific
community and it is incumbent upon us to insure accuracy in what is taught
to all children.
Sincerely,
Ed Barney
President
Federal Way School Board"
Meeting on 23 January, the board will no doubt receive quite an earful from the locals (I'll be there), who must have been asleep during the elections. From what I've read, none of the board members bothered to watch the movie. Being there isn't any plausible scientific argument against global warming, I doubt teachers will be able to find appropriate materials rebutting the movie. Therefore, in effect, the movie has been banned.
Cheers from the Goofy States of America!
Other Comments by EMD
25. Comment #17829 by Rourke Ditters on January 16, 2007 at 9:36 pm
This is my first time posting in here, so please be patient with me. I'm still 'getting a feel' for things here...I would like to continue with this 'game', though, as it seems fun.
A slide-rule doesn't belong in an art gallery, and neither does a Thomas Kinkade painting, because it's not art.
Other Comments by Rourke Ditters
26. Comment #17836 by Radix2 on January 17, 2007 at 12:12 am
Frosty: Pay careful attention here. Listed below are some of the RadioMetric techniques used to date the Earth. You will notice that there are sometimes significant overlaps in their effective dating ranges, which allows rocks to be dated by multiple methods and a consensus reached. C14 is only ever used to date organic materials up to circa 55kyaTechnique/Age Range (billion years)
___________________________________
uranium-lead/3.60±0.05
lead-lead/3.56±0.10
lead-lead/3.74±0.12
lead-lead/3.62±0.13
rubidium-strontium/3.64±0.06
rubidium-strontium/3.62±0.14
rubidium-strontium/3.67±0.09
rubidium-strontium/3.66±0.10
rubidium-strontium/3.61±0.22
rubidium-strontium/3.56±0.14
lutetium-hafnium/3.55±0.22
samarium-neodymium/3.56±0.20
There are more accurate and better techniques now such as Potassium-Argon (K-Ar)
Incidentally, Bishop Usher used the bible to calculate the age of the earth to approx 4004BC - so your calculations are out by a factor of two.
So even *if* you were right, you would be wrong.
Anyway - have a read of this:
Radiometric Dating - A Christian Perspective
http://www.asa3.org/aSA/resources/Wiens.html
Other Comments by Radix2
27. Comment #17842 by Logicel on January 17, 2007 at 2:12 am
Radix2, Thanks for that great link, and it is now duly bookmarked. Here is a bio note of the scientist that wrote the essay:Dr. Wiens received a bachelor's degree in Physics from Wheaton College and a PhD from the University of Minnesota, doing research on meteorites and moon rocks. He spent two years at Scripps Institution of Oceanography (La Jolla, CA) where he studied isotopes of helium, neon, argon, and nitrogen in terrestrial rocks. He worked seven years in the Geological and Planetary Sciences Division at Caltech, where he continued the study of meteorites and worked for NASA on the feasibility of a space mission to return solar wind samples to Earth for study. Dr. Wiens wrote the first edition of this paper while in Pasadena. In 1997 he joined the Space and Atmospheric Sciences group at Los Alamos National Laboratory, where he has been in charge of building and flying the payload for the solar-wind mission, as well as developing new instruments for other space missions. He has published over twenty scientific research papers and has also published articles in Christian magazines. Dr. Wiens became a Christian at a young age, and has been a member of Mennonite Brethren, General Conference Baptist, and Conservative Congregational, and Vineyard denominations. He does not see a conflict between science in its ideal form (the study of God's handiwork) and the Bible, or between miracles on the one hand, and an old Earth on the other.
Other Comments by Logicel
28. Comment #17848 by Radix2 on January 17, 2007 at 3:19 am
Logicel wrote on January 17, 2007 at 2:12 am"Radix2, Thanks for that great link, and it is now duly bookmarked."
You are welcome. You may find some other useful information at the Talk.Origins Archive here: http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/outline.html
That site is the collected efforts of many scientists and laymen over the past decade or so. Aside from containing a wealth of information, there is a rather amusing section where the creationist claims are indexed and debunked (they never seem to come up with anything new). You can access that directly from this URL: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/
If you want to meet some real live creationists repeating the same thing over and over again (plus the relevant debunkings) check out http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/
Other Comments by Radix2
29. Comment #17856 by captain underpants on January 17, 2007 at 4:16 am
The global warming bandwagon is beginning to resemble a religion
Denialists are fond of claiming that there is a lack of consensus among climatologists. Even if that were the case, the answer must surely be: the mere suspicion that there might be a causal link between anthropogenic CO2 emissions and climate change ought to be cause for great concern. Carrying on regardless in full awareness of the risk is criminally irresponsible.
Other Comments by captain underpants
30. Comment #17860 by Tintern on January 17, 2007 at 4:28 am
If six parents complained about the film, shouldn't the article mention that a few approved of it? Is this not a fairly unbalanced piece of writing that an editor should correct? A reason for annoyance is the usual utterance that we'll all burn in the end etc. etc. However, a reason for hope is the news that children were viewing the film as fact. Smart kids holding out against such nonsense maybe gives us hope.Other Comments by Tintern
31. Comment #17863 by scot on January 17, 2007 at 4:38 am
Jack Rawlinson,My comment was in response to Murslak "How much longer to do we have to deal with ignorance as pertains to public misunderstanding of science?" Much of the public's understanding comes from media hype and entertainment films. Check out this link and see what you think.
http://epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759
http://epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759
Other Comments by scot
32. Comment #17899 by Kismettena on January 17, 2007 at 11:23 am
"Frosty Hardison""end times"
Sorry, cannot comment seriously.
Other Comments by Kismettena
33. Comment #17900 by Kismettena on January 17, 2007 at 11:23 am
"seven children"Other Comments by Kismettena
34. Comment #18115 by scottishgeologist on January 18, 2007 at 11:47 am
Hi KismettenaYes, I noticed that "seven children" business as well. Doesnt that just beautifully dovetail with that utterance about "condoms not belonging in school"
Obviously condoms dont belong in Frosty's house either. Maybe she's one of these "quiverful" types:
Try www.quiverfull.com for some of this lunacy. Or that advert on the website: "Birthing Gods mighty warriors"
Quote:
A hard-hitting, scripturally based expose on the emotional, physical, and spirtual damage caused by the secular idea of birth control.
We are living in the last days. An annointed generation must come to earth to help prepare the way of the Lord. Many in this generation will be children. Will these chosen children be allowed to come? Satan is trying hard to prevent their conceptions and births. Birthing God's Mighty Warriors exposes how Satan has used the secular idea of choice and modern medical advances to convince God's people to limit their family size through birth control and sterilization. Sadly, thousands of couples are suffering emotionally, physically, and spiritually because they have chosen their own path. This book exposes how the enemy is using human reasoning, deception in the media, ideas in pop culture, and lack of knowledge of God's Word to keep God's people bound to a worldly mindset. Birthing God's Mighty Warriors offers hope for restoration through God's forgiveness. By revealing truth, it challenges young couples to learn from the mistakes of the past so they can be open to bring forth this anointed generation of children.
Can it get any worse? Please tell me it cant....
Other Comments by scottishgeologist
35. Comment #18125 by jeff_n on January 18, 2007 at 12:57 pm
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this so far. Apparently some evangelicals are joining scientists in calling for changes in public policy to avert global warming:"The Rev. Rich Cizik, public policy director for the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), and Nobel-laureate Eric Chivian, director of the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School, were among 28 signers of a statement that demands urgent changes in values, lifestyles and public policies to avert disastrous changes in climate."
(from TechNewsWorld)
You can read more here.
Other Comments by jeff_n
36. Comment #18396 by jsvramirez on January 20, 2007 at 2:50 pm
The global warming bandwagon is beginning to resemble a religion.Indeed Heidi Cullen, a personality from The Weather Channel, has suggested that meteorologists who do not agree with the theory of global warming lose their Certification from the American Meteorological Society.
http://climate.weather.com/blog/archive/200612.html
Sounds like excommunication to me...don't agree and face the penalty.
"Global Warming is the true word, and you blaspheme...begone infidel!"
Other Comments by jsvramirez
37. Comment #22350 by Jeebus on February 15, 2007 at 2:16 am
The global warming bandwagon is beginning to resemble a religion.Rubbish. Denial of global warming, however, is exactly like a religion. It is the willful ignorance of evidence to avoid a truth that you would rather wasnt quite so true. As with religion, an intollerance to this mental cowardice is the only way forward. Watch the film, I dare you.
Other Comments by Jeebus
38. Comment #22357 by scot on February 15, 2007 at 4:09 am
Jeebus,By denial of global warming, do you mean denial of climate change, or denial that it is caused by human activity? I agree with you that ignoring evidence to avoid an unpleasant truth is wrong, which is why I say that the global warming bandwagon resembles religion. There is scientific evidence and theory currently being tested that disputes what so many have concluded about global warming and it is being ignored by people such as yourself, because you have concluded that the cause of global warming is human. Full stop. Are you "willfully ignoring evidence to avoid a truth that you would rather wasn't quite so true?"
Other Comments by scot
39. Comment #22361 by Mikado on February 15, 2007 at 4:53 am
Religion should be kept out of schools.Other Comments by Mikado
40. Comment #60460 by hoemaco on August 2, 2007 at 2:12 am
I partly agree with DrShell - the fact that it has the name of a politician doesn't help - but I also believe it'd suffered the same effect were it not so.I am ashamed to admit I have not seen the movie, however, I do have my reservations. Though I don't know too much about Al Gore, I can't sincerely believe someone who has been US vicepresident - as far as I remember, US has always opposed Kioto etc. Where were his ideas when he was in office? I'd also not be surprised to find that he is polluting the environment more than a dozen families together (cars, plane trips, maybe owned companies, etc). After all, he's not a poor man, is he?
Actually, in Hungary we do not allow politicians into our schools (except for some ceremonies, but they can not talk about party politics).
I'd be happier to see a film signed by say MIT/Berkeley/Harvard or world meteorological organisation etcetera. And to see such a movie in which scientists' views differ at least a little bit. As far as I've heard about it, there is no 100% consensus on causes and effects of global warming. Some scientists showed me graphs which stated that the mean temperature has been increasing since the last ice age and that it should rise even more according to ice age studies, and it was before they calculated with man-caused warming. Other scientists warned of global cooling (though caused by the same effects as warming). Of course, I must agree with captain underpants that the slightest suspicion in this matter should be enough to deal with this.
Btw the connection is plainly visible - kids learnin school there is no thing such as global warming, and then they go and vote on someone who can only say 'in god I trust' and make a more ridiculous face than any circus chimp, and then this man (these men) further strenghten the said education. Circulus vitiosus.
Other Comments by hoemaco
41. Comment #61568 by hoemaco on August 5, 2007 at 7:54 pm
Some interesting comments about Gore's recent additions on Creation:http://www.randi.org/jr/2007-04/042707chop.html#i7
Other Comments by hoemaco
Upcoming Events:
About this site
Mailing List Signup: Enter your email
Go to The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
Richard Dawkins Articles | Comments | Tour Journal
Atheist Resources | Local Groups
Debate Points | Latest Responses
Links:
Quotes of Note:
"There may be fairies at the bottom of the garden. There is no evidence for it, but you can't prove that there aren't any, so shouldn't we be agnostic with respect to fairies?"
Richard Dawkins
"Religion. It's given people hope in a world torn apart by religion."
Jon Stewart
"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.."
Thomas Jefferson
"Who needs Satan when you have a God like this?"
Robert M. Price
"It ain't the parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand."
Mark Twain
Other Recommended Reading
Intelligent Thought
John Brockman (Editor)
Atheist Manifesto
Michel Onfray
Letter to a Christian Nation
Sam Harris
Richard Dawkins
Alan Grafen, Mark Ridley
Evolution
Jean-Baptiste de Panafieu
More Books
Adjust font size: 
"If this book doesn't change the world -- we're all screwed."
-Penn (Penn & Teller)
The God Delusion
by Richard Dawkins
Over 1.5 million copies sold
DVDs
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'AAI 2007 Conference' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Original Program' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
1. Comment #17697 by AJ Rae on January 15, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Authorities jump right on the teaching of science in science classes, but it takes a never ending battle for religion to not be taught in science classes.Other Comments by AJ Rae