Input: Relentless Climate Scaremongering in Schools. Output: Scared Children Skipping School and Calling for Help.

Will No-one Think of the Children?

There is a great deal to be concerned about in the exhibitions of infants and young children being used to carry climate placards last Friday, and of older children presumably choosing to carry them aided and abetted by teachers, parent, and others. It is not difficult to find photographs in the news media to illustrate adults posing with infants, and adults urging on older children to perform for the mass media, some carrying placards provided by political groups such as the 'Socialist Workers'.  

Some of the participants will have done it for a bit of a laugh – after all, it is different and it is attention-getting. Some are too young to know what is being done to them. But how can they best be helped if their teachers, in particular, are happy to see them used as placard carriers in school time? Some participants are adults who have been through the education system in recent decades, and these are perhaps the biggest immediate concern since they may be the hardest to help.    The youngsters may still be impressionable enough to be reached (somehow) in due course by calmer, more rational, more informed, and more scientific perspectives on climate variation and what we know about it. But who will help the adults with minds made up, and how will they do it?

In our booklet, Climate Control , Andrew Montford and I called, in 2014, for an official inquiry into the extent of climate alarm scaremongering in UK schools. We suspected this scaremongering was widespread since we had evidence of it in many areas of the curriculum. The events of last Friday suggest we were right to be suspicious, and that the need is still there for an inquiry to help establish just how bad it is. 

Astro-Turfing at Work?

There is another, less obvious reason for concern, and that is the existence of organisations intent on manipulation of children for political ends. As ever with ideologically-driven agitation, ‘the issue is not the issue’. Climate alarm is merely a hot topic that serves sundry purposes. The manipulators need not care two hoots about the details of the flimsy arguments for alarm, or critiques of them, when they can just ride on the waves of political and financial support these arguments have provided, and step off them on to other waves in due course.  But they leave behind people damaged because they have come to believe in one or more of the scare stories being pushed upon them.

This may be one such organisation in the States.  It was not at all clear to me who they are from their website called 'Schools for Climate Action' but they, or he or she, claim: 

‘We are a non-partisan, grassroots, youth-adult campaign with a mission to empower schools to speak up for climate action in order to protect current and future generations.‘

Here is another possible one, in Australia, called 'School Strike 4 Climate Australia'

who say:

'We are school students from cities and towns across Australia.  Most of us have never met before but are united by our concern about our planet.  ​We are striking from school to tell our politicians to take our futures seriously and treat climate change for what it is - a crisis.'

Jo Nova noted in 2015,  Greens using school children in Australia by getting them to write contrived letters to politicians: 

'  Gary Johns (former Labor Minister in the Keating Government) writes in The Australian that children are being dished up green speakers at school, asked to write letters about “their thoughts” to politicians, and taking letters home to parents seeking their permission to join the campaign which is run by a volunteer for The Greens. The children were offered sample activist letters to copy.'

Dennis Ambler, in a recent comment at the Climate Scepticism blog has drawn attention to some more useful links in this area:  'Oz Journalist Tony Thomas has spent a lot of time investigating the groups behind these propaganda strategies which are and have been operating in Australia again with Teacher support:'  

There are also a good few to be found amongst my own listings of websites aimed at children or teachers about climate.

The Sad Story of Swedish Schoolgirl Greta Thunberg

On WUWT earlier this year: 

'No need to make horror films anymore. Look what is being done to ourchildren'

That is the title of a post which provides a link to a video of Greta giving a TED talk.  It is quite moving to see such a young person making her statements like that, ill-informed though they are.  But as well as being a victim of climate scaremongering, she may also be a victim of PR-driven manipulation.

Andrew Montford has provided some background on this here, making use of research published in the Swiss Swiss magazine Weltwoche .  Here are some extracts from Andrew's article (as reported here):    

'Thunberg’s profile has only grown since. Her appearance at the UN climate conference in Poland propelled her to international fame. Most recently she was in Davos. Her message to the billionaires at the World Economic Summit was stark: ‘I want you to panic’ about climate change.'

and

'However, her sudden appearance in the limelight has led to some pointed questions: is Greta’s celebrity status less to do with chance and more to do with a carefully orchestrated public relations campaign?

and

'It revealed that Thunberg’s school strike had coincided neatly with the launch of a book about climate change written by her mother, Malena Ernman.  Is this a coincidence? It looks less like one when you learn from the same article that the first publicity of Thunberg’s protest came via the social media of the book’s PR man, Ingmar Rentzhog, on the day of its launch.'

and

'Further worrying details have also emerged. As well as working for Greta’s mother, Rentzhog had also recently launched a business called ‘We Don’t Have Time’, a sort of climate-focused PR agency.  In October 2018, he invited Greta to join the company’s Youth Advisory Board and in the weeks that followed he used her image intensively ahead of the company’s share issue.  This seems to have been very successful, bringing in something short of a million pounds. But whatever the figure, Greta has proved to be an extraordinarily lucrative asset for Mr. Rentzhog, and the environmental press has been extraordinarily helpful too.'

Meanwhile, a UK schoolgirl 'striker' speaks out in The Guardian

Here’s an essay by one of the older schoolchildren (17 years old) who have ‘gone on strike’. She clearly has wound herself up into quite a state of fury and dismay over climate. Her position seems to be: some scientists have said we are facing catastrophe, therefore we are facing catastrophe, therefore grown-ups should be behaving as if we were. This is not a substantial position given the feebleness of the case for that ‘catastrophe’. Nor does it take note of the massive harm that would likely follow from even more grown-ups supporting ‘climate action’. Too much harm has already been done, and the momentum of such as the UK’s Climate Change Act does not yet seem spent.

Forward tho I canna see ...

So, there are groups of people who will be pleased with what happened last Friday. Is this their last hurrah? 

Will wiser minds (and wiser heads of schools) begin to prevail to (a) discourage this mass truancy, (b) investigate how it came to pass, and (c) look for ways to help the children and adults develop a calmer, more informed view of climate variation.  Geoff Chambers points to the children's crusades of the 13th century - hopefully an implausible scenario for what might happen next, but a cautionary tale nevertheless:

'It started as a quasi-religious movement, led by a few persuasive individuals who created an atmosphere of mass hysteria which infected the uneducated and intellectuals alike; then it became an intergovernmental affair, organised at the supranational level; but due to international rivalries and the failure to agree on objectives, it petered out. Its final manifestation was as a mass movement of children (egged on by adults) which ended in slavery or death by starvation for most of the participants.'

There is to be another exhibition of 'climate alarmed children' in the UK, and elsewhere, on 15th March.  Perhaps that will give us more insight into the further success of those who would use children as pawns and placard bearers ostensibly for the cause of climate alarm.

Note added 19 Feb 2019.  Speculation in Germany and elsewhere that Russia is behind recent climate demonstrations by schoolchildren.  They were behind such groups as the CND in the 1960s, so it would not surprise me if they were using their agitprop skills to manipulate youngsters and associated useful idiots in order to weaken 'the West'.
See: https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/is-russia-behind-climate-change-protests-in-eu-definitely-yes-says-ukraine
(hat-tip GWPF  https://mailchi.mp/1f95a254fdb2/german-climate-law-put-off-as-government-splits-deepen )
Note added 20 Feb 2019.  Andy Shaw has written a thoughtful, sympathetic essay about the schoolchildren's protests.  He also has some ideas on how we can help them:
'I think that we should appeal to positive side of young people protesting. We should appeal to their sense of agency and purpose. Many teenagers are intellectually curious and want to work things out for themselves. Everyone feels the need to fit in, but not necessarily follow the herd.

We should pose questions. Is this really true? Is this the only way of looking at it? What do other people say? Everything has a cost and a benefit, what are they? Where debate is closed down and one side are castigated and labelled, independent thinkers should ask why.'

Note added 02 Mar 2019.  More evidence of sinister exploitation of young people by persons possibly unknown: an 'open letter' published in the Guardian, and reported on here at WUWT:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/02/we-the-young-open-letter-from-the-student-climate-change-strikers/

A New(ish) Climate Comic Book: more self-indulgent, shallow exhibitionism

Behold another person enjoying the frisson of climate doom, and the gratification of being seen to be doing something about it:

'French cartoonist Philippe Squarzoni has taken up the huge task of trying to convey the complex science of climate science and the global emergency that it implies in the form of his autobiographical/documentary graphic novel titled ‘Climate Changed’. '

Source

'Hopefully, this will enable the general public, which does not always seem inclined to wade through dense texts on scientific topics, to get a better appreciation of the challenges of global warming.' [published 2014]

Source:  https://www.dhakatribune.com/feature/2019/02/09/climate-changed-a-comic-book-warning-about-global-warming


But the evidence for a 'global emergency' is lacking.

Merely pointing to adverse weather events is not good enough.  Even pointing to the modest warming that has taken place over the last 150 years or so is not good enough.  Both can be explained by 'business as usual' in the weather system.  The bar really ought to be set a lot higher when it comes to promising doom and destruction to us all unless we wreck our current way of life.

There have been plenty of publications from scientific experts to warn us about being too hasty and getting into a panic about our CO2 emissions - some can be found in this listing for example. 

But here's an extract from a very recent critique of climate scaremongering from Belgium:

'The current climate model (‘IPCC model’) systematically yields highly overstated predictions compared to measurements and can therefore not be used to form climate policy – especially if that policy results in extremely high costs and destabilises vital parts of the energy infrastructure.

We are not just saying that. Already some of the most renowned scientists have preceded us (e.g. Freeman Dyson, Frederic Seitz, Robert Jastrow, William Nierenberg), including Nobel Prize winners (e.g. Ivar Giaever and Robert Laughlin). They also argue that the earth’s climate is far too complicated to be explained by a simple one-dimensional CO2 relationship.'

And later on, they comment on the strategy of using children to promote climate alarm:

'Child being misused by alarmists

b). In Belgium, the climate movement has now also started using children for their ideological cause. A rather peculiar strategy. What children need to learn is to take a critical look at the facts. So what is happening now goes against everything that education should stand for. We are increasingly seeing children being abused to achieve goals.

Who remembers that washed ashore refugee boy on the beach, an image that was frequently used by refugee organisations, or the asylum boy who had a microphone pushed under his nose with TV crew chairman Dijkhoff, or the crying Lili and Howick in the NOS news, etc.? Anyone who wants to be proved right by putting children at the front of their causes is morally reprehensible. Teachers who work in this manner should be deeply ashamed.'

Source: Climate Intelligence Foundation, as reported by WUWT:  https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/08/refutation-of-the-the-belgian-climate-manifesto-by-the-climate-inteligence-foundation/

Evil is as evil does: developing ways to strike eco-terror into children

There are lots of examples in this blog alone of deliberate efforts to scare children about our supposed impact on climate and the environment in general.  Here is one which as far as I know was never deployed widely (but it was, for example, used in a primary school in Las Vegas in 2013), but it nevertheless won an 'NNSA award' for its instigator.  That's the National Nuclear Security Administration -see https://www.energy.gov/nnsa/about-nnsa.  Who knew they were on the eco-alarm bandwagon?  Why, I wonder?  What was in it for them?  Looking good to their government masters I suppose by aping and abetting the 'sustainability aka eco-alarm' fad.  Bit of a sideshow for an agency charged with looking after nuclear weapons, but there you go, that's politics for you.

There it is, on the left, the 'Green-Reaper'.  




Eric Boehm describes it all very neatly in his article on the Reason site two days ago:

'...

Thanks to a FOIA request from journalist Emma Best, the details of which were published this week at Muckrock, we now know a bit more about the history of the Green Reaper—a verdant version of the Grim Reaper that manages to combine the ominous presence of the original with the vacant eyes of a cartoon character. While the mascot seems best suited to shatter children's innocence by informing them about the inevitabilty of their own deaths, the documents show that the Green Reaper, which was designed in 2012, was intended to be used in "community outreach presentations to local elementary school children" and in internal memos reminding government workers to conserve energy and carpool when possible.

One of the most terrifying details in the FOIA'd documents is the claim that—in addition to making appearences at schools—the Green Reaper shows up "randomly" at the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Um, no thank you.

The Green Reaper costume cost about $5,000 to manufacture, but the documents provided to Muckrock don't give a full accounting of how much time public employees spent brainstorming and designing it. Regardless, the government liked the design so much that Dawn Starett, the program manager who invented the Green Reaper, won a 2013 Environmental Stewardship Award from the NNSA for it.

...'

Hat-tip: Glenn Reynolds  who provided this link to a piece by Ann Althouse:
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-green-reaper-mascot-department-of.html

Details of the FOIA request that uncovered this 'piece of work' are here: https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/green-reaper-53571/

Note added 25 Mar 2019.  A video highlighting the Green Reaper, and going to look at climate anxieties, and climate scare propaganda aimed at children:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsXIxk5fBfo

Christmas Greetings

J S Bach wrote some pretty good music!  His Christmas Oratorio has added to the joy and beauty of this time of year.

Also a time of good cheer!

Here's to 2019.  May it be a great year for the sharing of
rational analyses of climate variation, and may that lead to
better informed teachers and children everywhere.

COP24 Climate Alarm PR idea: Let's Try Anxious Children instead of Polar Bears or Hockey Sticks

Pic: KIARA WORTH/IISD/ENB

This picture on the left was used as the lead image in a BBC news item reporting on key results from the COP24 meeting in Poland this month.  It shows children roped-in to convey the latest 'only x time units left' climate alarm message.  One of a long list, some of which are recalled in a recent article on WUWT.

But back to the BBC.  Their author notes 'One of the most striking things about this conference of the parties was the presence of energised young people in far greater numbers than I have ever seen them at a COP before.', and goes on to conclude his piece with a photo and a quote from the troubled Swedish schoolgirl who has been presented as the leader of school 'strikes' to promote climate alarm.

What I take to be an official blog/site for COP24 is also big on children: check out this video on how they were used in the opening ceremony:

Indeed, there was a section of the conference explicitly for getting children involved in producing recommendations:

'This Friday, December 14th, during the Climate Change Conference

COP24 in Katowice, young Polish delegates will take part in a discussion

panel entitled “No climate for young generation…”, organized by UNICEF

Poland and The UNEP/GRID-Warsaw Centre.'

'Representatives of the young generation from different regions

of Poland will meet at the event of the Polish Presidency at the

COP24 to jointly debate issues related to climate change. 25

delegates, supported by experts, will discuss the most

 important challenges in selected areas ...'

'...At the end of the meeting young people will write recommendations

regarding urgent actions in the field of climate protection... '

The intellectual and/or moral poverty of climate alarm

campaigners has been easy to illustrate for years.  This
latest COP parade adds to the pile.  As more and more
adults are able to tackle, refute, and object to the specious
and hyperbolic claims of those seek to raise alarm over our
impact on climate variation, it makes sense for campaigners
to increase their already substantial attention on children -
not only to brainwash them for future use, but also to use
them now as levers on political power. 

How about a conference on how to help children cope with
and recover from the climate alarmism foisted upon them?

How about recommendations to help adults who have been
harmed by such alarm during their school years?

Let us not forget that the case for alarm over our impact on

climate is a frail and unsatisfactory one.  It may have a place
in academic discussions, but it does not have anything like
enough substance to be used for important decision-making.
Professor Nir Shaviv summarised this neatly the other day
in an address to the German parliament (emboldening by me):

'Three minutes is not a lot of time, so let me be brief. I’ll start 
with something that might shock you. There is no evidence 
that CO2 has a large effect on climate. 

'The two arguments  used by the IPCC to so called “prove” 
that humans are the main cause of global warming, and 
which implies that climate sensitivity is high, are that: 
a) 20th century warming is unprecedented, and 
b) there is nothing else to explain the warming.  
These arguments are faulty.'

Note added 19 Dec 2018. See the Shaviv link above for more

details of his position. I would also recommend the NIPCC reports 

as excellent sources of more information on rational rather than

ideological perspectives on climate variation.  The summary version

of their latest report is a good place to start.

Note added 20 Dec 2018.  The Global Warming Policy Foundation
(GWPF) has just published a note concerning some of the shoddiness
in the recent IPCC report.  Here are the concluding paragraphs:

'The SR1.5 report represents a very significant departure from
previous IPCC reports in the direction of increased alarm regarding
global warming, particularly as compared with the Fifth Assessment.

No rigorous justification for this departure has been provided.
In reality, since the Fifth Assessment considerable evidence has
accumulated suggesting that global warming is more of a long-term
threat than a planetary emergency.

This evidence consists mainly of observational results suggesting
lower climate sensitivity (i.e. less warming in response to any given
increase in greenhouse gas concentrations) and results indicating a
greater contribution from natural variability to explaining observed
global temperature trends.

The IPCC has not passed on this evidence to policymakers in its
SR1.5 report. The report has also not passed on to policymakers
some very important information published by climate modellers
since the last IPCC assessment report regarding the empirical tuning
of climate models to achieve desired results.

The failure of previous IPCC reports to document the models’ tuning
procedures has been described by these modellers as a ‘lack of
transparency’. The projections of future warming published by the
IPCC are completely dependent on the reliability of these models.
In view of these deficiencies, the SR1.5 report does not merit being
regarded by policymakers as a scientifically rigorous document.

There is much recent scientific evidence, not referred to in the report,
to support a more considered mitigation strategy than the extreme
measures proposed in the report. Meanwhile, the worthy goals discussed
in the report, such as sustainable development, poverty eradication
and reducing inequalities, should be pursued on their own merits
and not made dependent on unsettled climate science.'

The note was written by Prof J R Bates.

(' Professor J. Ray Bates is Adjunct Professor of Meteorology in the Meteorology

and Climate Centre at University College Dublin. He was formerly Professor of

Meteorology at the Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, and a Senior

Scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Centre. In his early career he was

Head of Research at the Irish Meteorological Service.)