Tweet
Originally posted by Doktor
View Post
Let me make this easier....
Again... why should we?
-
Not that we can really do either, but let's assume we could for a moment. The question then is, why should we?
Let me make this easier....
Again... why should we? -
Because if we don't, our children and their children might not know what snow is.Originally posted by Wooglin View PostNot that we can really do either, but let's assume we could for a moment. The question then is, why should we?
Let me make this easier....
Again... why should we?
We have only 67.3 months left before climate change becomes irreversible.
Think about the children...."Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.Comment
-
I can't really comment on the global climate cult because the board rules specifically prohibit bashing someone's religion.Comment
-
Not that this will be a surprise to many here, but it does help explain many of the ill-prepared drones that have been chewed up and spit out in this thread over the years.
National Association of Scholars says ‘The fossil fuel divestment movement, is an exercise in futility.’ | Watts Up With That?National Association of Scholars says ‘The fossil fuel divestment movement, is an exercise in futility.’
National Association of Scholars LogoNEW YORK, March 25, 2015 /PRNewswire/ — As United Nations delegates gather this week to negotiate new Sustainable Development Goals, the National Association of Scholars released the first major critical report detailing how the campus sustainability movement harms higher education.
Sustainability: Higher Education’s New Fundamentalism shows that the sustainability movement distorts college curricula and cuts off free inquiry on important questions. The 260-page report also shows that, at a time when tuition and student debt are soaring, colleges are spending lavishly on sustainability programs.
The study shows how the sustainability movement has shut down reasoned debate on campuses by foreclosing open inquiry about climate change. (The report takes no position on global warming itself.) The report criticizes the 685 institutions that have signed the American College and University President’s Climate Commitment for demanding of students and faculty members “blind obedience” in the place of critical examination of the facts.
The Greening of the Curriculum
Students can now earn credentials in sustainability in 1,438 distinct college programs, ranging from certificates to doctoral degrees. But sustainability is also a theme that has spread across the whole college curriculum, including seemingly unlikely subjects such as English composition, mathematics, and psychology.
“Harnessing higher education and the liberal arts into the service of sustainability seriously undermines their purpose,” said Peter Wood, co-author of the report and president of the National Association of Scholars. “It treats other disciplines as mere grist for the sustainability mill.”
What Sustainability Costs
The report examines how much colleges and universities spend to achieve their sustainability goals. Using Middlebury College in Vermont as a case study, the authors find that the costs far outrun the purported savings. Middlebury spends close to $5 million annually on sustainability efforts. The report estimates that American colleges and universities overall spend over $3 billion annually on sustainability-related programs and initiatives.
“Colleges and universities fail any test of transparency on the costs of sustainability,” said Wood. “Colleges routinely boast that their sustainability ‘investments’ save money, but they make these claims behind an opaque wall.”
The Nudge-Culture of Sustainability
Sustainability: Higher Education’s New Fundamentalism shows that many colleges and universities attempt to manipulate students into complying with sustainability goals. Students are not only bombarded with promotional material and pressured by peers, they are also manipulated with sophisticated programs designed by psychologists to “nudge” them into new patterns of behavior.
“The campus sustainability commitment represents a significant shift in higher education, away from giving students access to rational and moral knowledge that prepares them for wise, conscious choices, and towards training operations that elicit automatic responses,” stated Rachelle Peterson, co-author of the report.
Divestment: Sustainability’s Last Frontier
The study examines the growing demands by sustainability advocates for colleges and universities to divest their holdings in carbon-based energy companies.
“The fossil fuel divestment movement,” said Peterson, “is an exercise in futility. Its leaders fully understand that divestment, even if college trustees went along with it, would have no effect on fossil fuel companies or the environment. The divestment movement is really aimed at reinforcing the loyalty of students to the firebrands of the sustainability cause, who need a mass of followers in order to gain political leverage.”
About the National Association of Scholars
NAS is a network of scholars and citizens united by their commitment to academic freedom, disinterested scholarship, and excellence in American higher education. We uphold the standards of a liberal arts education that fosters intellectual freedom, searches for the truth, and promotes virtuous citizenship.
National Association of ScholarsLast edited by Wooglin; 26 Mar 15,, 16:49.Comment
-
that message would have more meaning if it wasn't for the obvious political bias of the organization giving it....
National Association of Scholars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
mountain out of a molehill. in any case, even if one does not believe in AGW, there's nothing wrong in more effective use of resources, which is the heart of the sustainability movement.There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac AsimovComment
-
Of course. We all know it can only be meaningful when it's delivered by those you already agree with.Originally posted by astralis View Post
Where in that article was it suggested there is something wrong with more effective use of resources? I must have missed that.mountain out of a molehill. in any case, even if one does not believe in AGW, there's nothing wrong in more effective use of resources, which is the heart of the sustainability movement.Comment
-
-
wooglin,
it's completely meaningless. an organization dedicated to finding "liberal bias at universities" releases a report that shows....liberal bias at universities. in this case, defining sustainability not as more effective use of resources but as the new hidden hand of liberal tyranny and fascism. yawn.Of course. We all know it can only be meaningful when it's delivered by those you already agree with.
stick to the scientific articles that you post; that's rather more enlightening than cheap agitprop and the ever-popular explanation of logical fallacies.There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac AsimovComment
-
Why bother with studies and scientific articles? Seems so much easier to just respond with "liberal scientists paid to find global warming... find global warming. yawn".Originally posted by astralis View PostComment
-
I don't have a quote handy, but as I recall, the actual question was whether they believe that humans were responsible, at least in part, for the measured increase in carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere. I don't find it at all surprising that 90% of the people -- a few scientists and a heck of a lot of bureaucrats -- who were paid six-figure salaries to agree with that statement actually did agree with it. Then, a year later, 95% of those surviving scientists and bureaucrats who were allowed to keep their jobs once again said they still agreed with it.
This doesn't address the science of meteorology at all, of course. But as a sortie into the realms of political science and psychology, it's fascinating stuff.Comment
-
What do the climate change deniers have to say about the Antarctica?
Antarctica’s floating ice is melting
https://independentaustralia.net/env...celerates,7536
Antarctica's Ice Shelves Thin, Threaten Significant Sea Level Rise - Scientific AmericanComment
-
I certainly hope ice is melting. Again, if it's not melting, we're moving back to another ice age.ChimoComment
-
I was waiting for you to say that because there are about 400 million people who would violently disagree with you. See here:Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/29/wo...ange.html?_r=0
Once that happens, there is only one place for those 200 million people to go to and that is India and that means a readily made conflict over land and resources. So the GoI would strongly disagree with you. Count me as one of them.Comment
-
As the saying goes, we're in it for the spieces.Originally posted by Blademaster View PostChimoComment
-
I couldn't tell you. What do YOU have to say about what you posted?Originally posted by Blademaster View PostComment
Comment