Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Donate

Twitter Facebook YouTube Pinterest

RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
Keep me logged in
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Climate Hustle

NCSE's counter-Heartland flyers

Posted on 24 May 2017 by Guest Author

The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) is pleased to announce the on-line release of three flyers addressing the Heartland Institute's recent mailing of unsolicited climate change denial propaganda to science teachers across the country.

"Have You Received This? Then Read This" (PDF; one page) briefly explains why using the material in the classroom would be a mistake. "Top 5 Reasons Why This Book Doesn't Belong in Classroom" (PDF; four pages) amplifies, noting that the material gets the facts wrong, misrepresents the scientific consensus, slanders the gold standard of climate science review, contradicts state science standards, textbooks, and curricula, and uses sham citations and dishonest tactics. "Heartland's Claims Against the 97% Climate Consensus" (PDF; six pages) debunks a central claim of the material — that there is not a robust scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change — and explains the significance of the scientific consensus.

For further resources about the material, see the April 14, 2017, summary at NCSE's blog as well as a later story in Deutsche Welle (April 21, 2017) and Curt Stager's recent op-ed in The New York Times (April 27, 2017).

0 0

Bookmark and Share Printable Version  |  Link to this page

Comments

Comments 1 to 2:

  1. If this sort of climate nonsense and deceit is allowed into schools, where does it stop? Next anti vaccination and anti flouride rubbish will be allowed in. Children will become missinformed, and at the very least totally confused.

    I'm a strong believer in freedom of speech and rights of lobby groups, as far as the adult world goes, but I feel children have to be protected from rubbish from lobby groups, as they are not in a position to discern good from bad, or misleading information. Free speech is a right, but comes with a few responsibilities, and limits in some cases.

    0 0
  2. nigelj@1m

    You feel so strongly about protecting children and minorities from the rubbish by professional AGW denialist. What aould you then say about protecting future generations, as they will be bearing the brunt of those denialists who want to ensure lack of mitigation in their time, just like we bearing the brunt of our fathers who buned FF without limit throughout most of XX century. Future generations are even more vulnerable than current children, as they cannot say anything, they cannot even cry.

    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.



The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)

Smartphone Apps

iPhone
Android
Nokia

© Copyright 2017 John Cook
Home | Links | Translations | About Us | Contact Us