Parents of Climate-Scared Youngsters should Read This: 'there is no climate emergency'

Some children and young people are obviously genuinely scared by the climate propaganda they have been exposed to by their teachers and others who should've known better.   Being scared about the future is a rotten way to move towards the world of work and achievement.  These youngsters urgently need our help.  Getting them to read the declaration below would be an easy start to what may be a long process:

'There is no climate emergency

A global network of 500 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.

Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming

The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.

Warming is far slower than predicted

The world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate, and at less than half the rate to be expected on the basis of net anthropogenic forcing and radiative imbalance. It tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.

Climate policy relies on inadequate models

Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. Moreover, they most likely exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.

CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth

CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.

Global warming has not increased natural disasters

There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. For instance, wind turbines kill birds and insects, and palm-oil plantations destroy the biodiversity of the rainforests.

Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities

There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, we will have ample time to reflect and adapt. The aim of international policy should be to provide reliable and affordable energy at all times, and throughout the world.'

This has been signed by hundreds of scientists and climate policy experts.  Monckton of Brenchley describes them as follows: 'The Global Climate Intelligence Group, whose objective is to put the science back into climate science, comprises scientists, professionals and researchers from many nations, has already attracted some 500 signatures for what began life scant weeks ago as the European Climate Declaration.

The group, and the declaration, are the brainchild of Professor Guus Berkhout, emeritus professor of Geophysics in the Delft University of Technology. Professor Berkhout is a member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences./

More details here:  https://clintel.nl/prominent-scientists-warn-un-secretary-general-guterres/

Hat-tip WUWT: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/09/28/global-climate-intelligence-group-founded/

What is it like to read calm, rational, highly-informed reasoning on climate? Try Prof Nir Shaviv for starters.

The appalling, unhinged demonstrations on climate by schoolchildren, and their tragically duped and exploited figurehead Greta Thunberg, are a bit wearisome to say the least.  So, by way of a break, let us have a read of a calmer, highly-informed climate commentary from a penetrating rather than a brainwashed mind - that of Professor Nir Shaviv:

'Political and corporate leaders gathered for the climate week in New York City have urged significant action to fight global warming. But, given the high costs of the suggested solutions, could it be that the suggested cure is worse than the disease?

As a liberal who grew up in a solar house, I have always been energy-conscious and inclined toward activist solutions to environmental issues. I was therefore extremely surprised when my research as an astrophysicist led me to the conclusion that climate change is more complicated than we are led to believe. The disease is much more benign, and a simple palliative solution lies in front of our eyes. 

To begin with, the story we hear in the media, that most 20th-century warming is anthropogenic, that the climate is very sensitive to changes in CO2, and that future warming will, therefore, be large and will happen very soon, simply isn’t supported by any direct evidence, only a shaky line of circular reasoning. We “know” that humans must have caused some warming, we see warming, we don’t know of anything else that could have caused the warming, so it adds up.

However, there is no calculation based on first principles that leads to a large warming by CO2—none. Mind you, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports state that doubling CO2 will increase the temperatures by anywhere from 1.5 degrees to 4.5 degrees C, a huge range of uncertainty that dates back to the Charney committee from 1979.

In fact, there is no evidence on any time scale showing that CO2 variations or other changes to the energy budget cause large temperature variations. There is, however, evidence to the contrary. Tenfold variations in CO2 over the past half-billion years have no correlation whatsoever with temperature; likewise, the climate response to large volcanic eruptions such as Krakatoa.

Both examples lead to the inescapable upper limit of 1.5 degrees C per CO2 doubling—much more modest than the sensitive IPCC climate models predict. However, the large sensitivity of the latter is required in order to explain 20th-century warming, or so it is erroneously thought.

In 2008, I showed, using various data sets that span as much as a century, that the amount of heat going into the oceans, in sync with the 11-year solar cycle, is an order of magnitude larger than the relatively small effect expected simply from changes in the total solar output. Namely, solar activity variations translate into large changes in the so-called radiative forcing on the climate.

Since solar activity significantly increased over the 20th century, a significant fraction of the warming should be then attributed to the sun, and because the overall change in the radiative forcing due to CO2 and solar activity is much larger, climate sensitivity should be on the low side (about 1 to 1.5 degrees C per CO2 doubling).

In the decade following the publication of the above, not only was the paper uncontested, more data, this time from satellites, confirmed the large variations associated with solar activity. In light of this hard data, it should be evident by now that a large part of the warming isn’t human, and that future warming from any given emission scenario will be much smaller.

Alas, because the climate community developed a blind spot to any evidence that should raise a red flag, such as the aforementioned examples or the much smaller tropospheric warming over the past two decades than models predicted, the rest of the public sees a very distorted view of climate change—a shaky scientific picture that is full of inconsistencies became one of certain calamity.

With this public mindset, phenomena such as that of child activist Greta Thunberg are no surprise. Most bothersome, however, is that this mindset has compromised the ability to convey the science to the public.

One example from the past month is my interview with Forbes. A few hours after the article was posted online, it was removed by the editors “for failing to meet our editorial standards.” The fact that it’s become politically incorrect to have any scientific discussion has led the public to accept the pseudo-argumentation supporting the catastrophic scenarios.

Evidence for warming doesn’t tell us what caused the warming, and any time someone has to appeal to the so-called 97 percent consensus, he or she is doing so because his or her scientific arguments aren’t strong enough. Science isn’t a democracy.'

Read the full essay here: https://www.theepochtimes.com/how-climate-change-pseudoscience-became-publicly-accepted_3093372.html

[Hat-tip, and for more links to writing by Prof Shaviv, see Climate Depot ]

Are kids going to be permanently damaged by climate scaremongering?

The bizarre 'school strikes' and the sanctification of Greta Thunberg must continue to amaze and dismay anyone who knows even a modest amount about the climate system and climate variation.

macleans.ca

The absence of any remotely credible case for there being a 'climate emergency' will no doubt be apparent to future generations able to look back with dropped jaws at these recent events, and the decades of propaganda which led to them.  But will the young victims of the scaremongering ever recover from it?

Will the political forces behind the scaremongering ever want to let them recover?  After all, scared and bewildered people would seem well-suited to handing over more of their lives to government control, and to supporting all the various gravy trains that the scare has enriched with a trillion dollar market.

A recent post by Simon at Australian Climate Madness provides a neat summary, which I hope they won't mind my reproducing in full:

'The climate strikes aren’t about climate, they are about anti-capitalism

Most of the deluded kids on the climate “strikes” last week didn’t have a clue why they were there.

Enthusiastically cheered on by the mainstream media, it was a cheeky bludge off school and all they were doing was trying to “save the planet” right?

No of course not. These gullible kids are being exploited by all kinds of extreme-Left and anti-capitalist groups in order to bring about a wholesale societal change, using our children as their innocent pawns.

The website for the strikes refers to the need for “climate justice” which we all know is code for wealth redistribution from rich countries to poor, and an excuse for the usurping of normal democratic processes.

And as we no longer educate children to think for themselves, you can bet this brainwashing will last decades – possibly their entire lives.

Shameful.'

So, he reckons the kids will suffer for 'decades' more, or maybe 'their entire lives'.  It seems to me a major pastoral care effort is required - with 'ordinary' folks everywhere defending the very young from more of the same, and helping the existing victims develop a calmer, more informed perspective on both climate variation and on political manipulation.

Footnote.  One commenter on the ACM post asked for evidence of the politicisation of the climate scare.  Another promptly gave him a list of for instances:    https://australianclimatemadness.com/2019/09/23/the-climate-strikes-arent-about-climate-they-are-about-anti-capitalism/#comment-37903

The GWPF Climate Quiz for Children on 'Strike': what kind of a lousy crisis is this?

An excellent idea from the Global Warming Policy Foundation to help children decide if they are 'strike-ready' - in other words are they informed about just how bad this climate emergency is?

Try the questions here:  https://www.playbuzz.com/item/af7c2201-9cea-4b05-85cb-e826e021b6cc

You'll be asked about temperature rises, about floods, about world poverty, about forest cover, and more.

And the answers are provided at the end.

Hey, parents everywhere, your kids' teachers may be scaring them as poor Greta was scared at school,  but you don't have to let that stick.  Equip yourself with the answers to this short quiz and be on hand as your children give it a try.  

Not much to be scared about there, eh?

Addendum 1
Over in the States, meanwhile, there is a report of a panel of schoolchildren appointed to dictate climate policy:

'WASHINGTON, D.C.—At a panel on climate change held yesterday, the Senate brought in a group of excited third graders for ideas on fighting climate change.

“These kids have ideas and they are passionate, so we must listen to them,” said Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii. “There are no possible downsides to taking kids who have been told the world is ending by the public school system and allowing them to dictate national policies on important issues.”

The kids came up with the following list so far, though they say they’re “just spitballing” and the ideas need some fleshing out:

• Bribing the climate with cookies and candy
• Putting the climate on time-out
• Just ignoring climate change and playing Fortnite
• Building a giant magnet and sucking up all the bad climate stuff
• Buying a Nintendo Switch for every person in the nation (so they’ll stay inside and play Nintendo instead of driving cars)
• Making a big freeze ray gun like in Despicable Me and shooting the climate
• Pointing and laughing at cows who fart so they’ll be embarrassed and stop fartingthe Babyloe 
• Hey do you guys want to play some Minecraft? This is boring.'

See:  https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/09/20/panel-of-third-graders-to-dictate-nations-climate-change-policy/

And the source of this scoop:  'The Babylon Bee'

Addendum 2
For older pupils, there are some worthy suggestions re climate homework here:
https://spectator.us/homework-climate-strikers/

Climate 'Striking' Schools: "having children demonstrate on school time was the Soviet way"

Two extracts from an article in the New York Post: 

The ‘Climate Strike’ is a crock that exploits kids

By Karol Markowicz

September 17, 2019 | 8:08pm

{With my emphases added:}

'This Friday, in advance of the United Nations Climate Summit, students across the country will walk out of their schools as part of a Climate Strike. In New York City, the Department of Education has given its stamp of approval to the walk-out and won’t mark it as an absence, making it less “a strike” and more a coordinated effort by the school system to force political action on children.'

and

'In my Russian-speaking community, people took to Facebook to discuss the similarities they saw to their time in the Soviet Union. One mom posted that the strike is “Soviet-style brainwashing and propaganda” Another mom wrote that the particular issue doesn’t matter; “having children demonstrate on school time was the Soviet way.”

One Park Slope elementary school sent parents a note that the entire school will be walking out for the strike. A mother of a 6-year-old told me, in response: “I am all for people supporting causes they believe in, but do not force your causes and beliefs on my first-grader.”

Another mom told me she believes in climate change and thinks the government should take action but finds the strike absurd. She’s afraid to single her kid out by making him skip it and isn’t speaking up.'

Read the whole article here:  https://nypost.com/2019/09/17/the-climate-strike-is-a-crock-that-exploits-kids/

Note added 19 Sep 2019.  The kids stand on thin ice, as do all the eco-zealots who have been pushing the children to 'strike'.  Delingpole has exposed a goodly selection of their nonsenses and deceptions:   https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/18/delingpole-fact-checking-alarmist-kids-false-claims-at-climate-crisis-hearing/

Poor Greta was scared by fake news from CO2 alarmists about polar bears

Susan Crockford has a new post up about the deceptive, political goal-driven propaganda based on polar bears:

'These starving polar bears falsely blamed on climate change have scared kids to death'

Can anyone get through to Greta Thunberg about these and other deceptions which she has accepted as gospel?  Or to any of the probably many tens of thousands of youngsters similarly scared by what they have been told.  Or by what they have been duped into believing.

Here is a paragraph from the Crockford post:

'Here I summarize the truth about all four of these starving polar bear images that have been used since 2009 to emotionally manipulate the public (especially young girls), into getting on board the climate change band wagon. Rational people have seen through the rhetoric and come to realize that climate change is virtually never the cause of starvation. However, some poor kids have been scared to death by these images and the stories of climate change catastrophe they inspired – they are very real victims of climate change messaging at its worst.'

Click the link by the picture above to read the rest.  And try to protect any children you know from this sort of abuse.  The polar bears are generally doing OK.  But Greta and the others are most certainly not.

Note added 27 Sep 2019.  Poor Greta flounders when she does not have a script provided for her:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bwLt_5t73g   Who does provide her scripts?
Note added 29 Sep 2019.  More details of those behind the abusive exploitation of this poor child:   https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2019/09/28/gretas-soros-connections/
and more here on their lack of imagination:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/greta_thunbergs_speech_to_un_strangely_resembles_a_1992_un_speech_by_12yearold_severn_cullissuzuki.html

Climate-scared pupils and teachers take note:- a calmer mind leads the World Meteorological Organisation

'London, 6 September: The General-Secretary of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) says that the alarmist narrative on climate change has gone off the rails and criticised the news media for provoking unjustified anxiety.

Speaking to Finland's financial newspaper Talouselämä (“The Journal”) on 6 September 2019, Petteri Taalas called for cooler heads to prevail, saying that he does not accept arguments of climate alarmists that the end of the world is at hand.'

See this GWPF press release:  https://www.thegwpf.com/wmo-secretary-general-warns-against-climate-doomsters-and-extremists/

It is not much by itself, but such sanity and sense is all too rare in the fervid mass media and in politics (see the lunacy at the recent 'Climate Townhall'* for presidential candidates in the USA for example).  Thanks to the shameful exploitation of Greta Thunberg, many schoolchildren are also being drawn into the madness and despair, some with the active support of teachers and administrators.  So, any calming voice in the midst of this intemperate, hyperbolic, and baseless panic is welcome.  Well done that man!

*Here are some reports of this sorry event:
https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/05/climate-change-hysteria-dangerous/
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/09/cnns-7-hour-climate-change-townhall-was-a-man-made-disaster-for-democrat-presidential-candidates/
https://pjmedia.com/election/cnns-climatetownhall-does-the-nation-a-great-service/

Note added 13 Sep 2019.  Sigh ... Powerful forces at work I guess.  The WMO chappie has somewhat backtracked:  
'Today, Taalas appears to have backtracked from this robust position, saying he had been wrongly portrayed as “questioning the international focus on the need for robust climate action”.'
As Benny Peiser points out (see link below), no one seems to have ever made such a portrayal.  It seems the poor man has been forced into a declaration of faith in the fanatical religion of the CO2 Doomsday Cult. 
https://www.thegwpf.com/wmo-secretary-general-denies-climate-heresy/

Pushing the CO2 Scare by 'Abusing Children : Abusing Science'

From the RealClimateScience blog:

'Climate alarmists have intentionally targeted children - to push their political objectives. Instead of holding an honest debate with adults, they have chosen to terrorize young people with their lies and propaganda. They are destroying science while simultaneously destroying the mental health of children.'

This new video from Tony Heller includes a clip from the vile propaganda movie made by the climate scaremongerers who called themselves '10:10'. His main point, other than to draw attention to the turpitude of the climate alarmists, is that in the United States, far worse weather has been seen in the past than in recent decades, and that there is no justification in scaring children about losing energy sources vital to modern life in the States and elsewhere. The United States could shut down completely and it would not impede the continued growth in global emissions of CO2 from fossil fuels and other man-made interventions.

He notes that the alarmers generally refuse to debate knowledgeable people like him, and far prefer to scare children as a source of leverage for their political ambitions. While demonising, and marginalising informed critics of the weak and sloppy science the alarmers claim as a foundation for their emotive campaigns.

Tony Heller's blog, Real Climate Science, is, amongst other merits, an invaluable resource for historical records of weather events gleaned from newspaper archives - the alarmists have not (yet?) found a way to adjust these the way they have been adjusting temperature records.

What about newspapers and other mass media today? Well, many of them cannot resist spinning weather events to support the Big Scare narrative. Paul Homewood's blog, Not a Lot of People Know That, is an excellent resource for refutation of such propaganda pieces in modern newspapers and mass media websites such as that of the BBC.

Children becoming 'the brainwashed front for the climate religion'

Sanjeev Sabhlok has written an excellent piece for the Times of India entitled

'Climate hysteria is a great opportunity to teach children to ask questions'

Here are the introductory paragraphs:

'Most adults have little or no time to investigate the claims about climate change. They either accept them, assuming that “authority figures” have done their homework, or sit on the fence.

Some consider that only scientists are supposed to understand science. But everyone has an equal place at the table of science and if our questions are not answered or the evidence doesn’t stack up, we are free to reject that “science”.

Climate alarm has long given up the pretence of any link to science. Millions have been successfully “converted” – and they get duly worked up if their belief is questioned: “have you been outside recently?”, “erratic climate events are everywhere!”, “rainfall is getting less every year!”, “flash floods, including in Rajasthan are clear proof!”.

Some of them have gone to the next stage and become missionaries. They go about distributing their religious pamphlets in schools, indoctrinating innocent lower-IQ children. Hopelessly confused children like Greta Thunberg are being churned out as a result. At an age when children like her should be learning to ask questions, they have become the brainwashed front for the climate religion. There is little difference between such “committed” youth and Hitler’s Youth or the youth churned out by ISIS’s madrassas.

In my view, if anyone tells a child that climate change is man-made just because someone says so (such as a missionary “scientist” but now increasingly, “royals” and “celebrities”), that person has committed a sin against the enlightenment, against human progress.

I would personally have been supportive of Greta Thunberg if she had been a prodigally intelligent child who dazzled her teachers with amazing questions, then found the answers and was now promoting a view that she thoroughly understood. It would not matter to me that she had come to the wrong conclusion. After all, no one can be right on everything all the time. But she suffers, sadly, from mental issues and speaks as a missionary – she cannot answer a single question about the science.

We are very prone as a species to superstitions, panics, delusions, manias and hysterias. We have gone through thousands of them (many still underway), such as religion, alchemy, witchcraft, astrology, phrenology, eugenics, the Y2K bug, the SARS panic, much of Ayurveda and Chinese traditional medicine and all of homeopathy.

The climate hysteria will ultimately pass, but to avoid such hysterias in the future we need to get our children to start thinking and stop believing. Climate change is a superb topic for teachers and students to explore.'

See the full article here:   https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/seeing-the-invisible/climate-hysteria-is-a-great-opportunity-to-teach-children-to-ask-questions/

(hat-tip: GWPF Newsletter 29/8/19 )

Sabhlok is proposing something positive to help prevent such madness again.  His notion of incorporating regular 'question-asking' into school curricula seems well worthy of consideration.  But it may also be useful in the shorter-term for helping children and young adults recover from the scaremongering about climate which they have been exposed to.  See the full article for examples of the questions Sabhlok thinks would be relevant on climate.

Note added later 30/8/19.   Here is an example of what we are up against - teachers wanting to encourage even more children to 'strike' over 'climate disruption'.  I doubt if a single one of these children can make a coherent case for alarm, or get beyond the shallow slogans of the zealots.  After all, I daresay neither can most of the adult zealots.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/30/climate-strike-teachers-students-greta-thunberg

CFACT: The UN’s cadre of misled youth

Picture: CFACT

'Sustainability' is UN-Speak for 'Suppressed Development', but it is also the latest 'Cloak of Green'* under which ambitious political and financial operators act in pursuit of their goals.   It sounds such a nice and harmless concept, sustainability, but it is not.  One organisation which clearly realises this is CFACT - see for example the book called 'Sustainability' available in their bookstore.  See also this new post by Craig Rucker on their blog:

'The UN is employing a disturbing tactic to push its “sustainability” agenda at its Civil Society Conference in Salt Lake City.

CFACT’s undercover reporter is on the ground in Salt Lake City, exposing how the UN heavily indoctrinates young people with talking points, then presents them on stage to regurgitate them.  “Look at the wisdom these young people have come to impart,” the rest of us are supposed to conclude.

Disney Channel’s Luke Mullen, told us, “I do believe that [school] strikes for the climate are just as important as education. Why should we be studying and preparing for a future that might not come?”  Watch CFACT Undercover’s full interview with Luke Mullen at CFACT.org.

Mullen told CFACT that he is following in the wake of poor Greta Thunberg, the young Swedish girl who has been so traumatized by the narrative of impending doom she’s been fed, that she walked out of school to become a propaganda poster child.  She’s encouraging kids like Luke Mullen to walk out too.  Greta just arrived in New York City on a carbon fiber yacht sponsored by the royal family of Monaco.  That she is protesting fossil fuels on an elite yacht made from oil and propane is lost on her.  She lacks the education and context to know.

Skip learning and just repeat the line’s you’ve been fed — These poor, exploited young people.  Think the mainstream media will expose this shameless trick?  Fear not.  CFACT’s on the job.

We interviewed Nicolette Templier, aka “Miss New York Earth USA.”  Her answers are simply a regurgitation of UN climate change alarmist talking points on everything from polar ice to polar bears, that fall to pieces when confronted with the facts.  Watch CFACT undercover’s full interview at CFACT.org.

The climate and “sustainability” crowd don’t like it when the facts are introduced into the UN proceedings one bit.  When the facts that debunk the UN’s dangerous agenda show up, the UN’s youth cadres drop their smiles and bare their claws.  You may remember CFACT’s coverage at UN COP 24 in Poland last fall.  The UN formally authorized an angry mob of left-wing youth to interrupt and shout down the Trump Administration’s energy presentation.  Shouting over instead of listening and responding?  How’s that for UN “civil society?”

CFACT is tackling this challenge on multiple fronts.  We expose the Green-Left’s exploitation of youth.  We inject facts into UN proceedings like the “sustainability” conference in Salt Lake.  We fairly present all sides of these important issues to thousands of young people through our CFACT Collegians program and challenge them  to think for themselves.

Thank you to everyone whose support makes this important work possible.

Facts and education are the antidote to propaganda and ignorance.'

* 'Cloak of Green' is the title of an important book by Elaine Dewar.

Eco-Porn designed to terrify children was used at a BBC concert 'for all the family'

'When buying tickets for a classical music concert based on the lost words of nature, parents may have expected a simple, poetic celebration of bluebells, conkers and otters.  Families who attended the BBC Proms  this weekend were instead confronted with catastrophic warnings from climate change campaigners.

BBC Proms, a celebration of classical music intended to be non-political, opened its 49th Prom of the season with a new composition based on the words of Greta Thunberg warning: “We are in the midst of the sixth mass extinction.”’

HannahFurness, Daily Telegraph Arts Correspondent, 26th August2019.

She goes on to report a scathing review of this shocking event:

'Ivan Hewett, Telegraph reviewer, said the concert was instead a “statement of the most extreme form of eco-catastrophism, designed to terrify and intimidate the mostly young audience, who clearly lacked the maturity to challenge it”. 

It’s unfortunate that the supposedly impartial BBC turned a promising event into an opportunity for eco-propaganda,” he said, in a two-star review, accusing the BBC of the “blatant politicising of an event aimed at children”.'

(hat-tip Greenie Watch)

'Unfortunate' to say  the least.  Well let us hope that this disgraceful abuse of a much-loved annual musical event will open up many more eyes to the corruption of the BBC, an organisation in thrall to eco-fanatics, and up to its neck in the moral and intellectual slops of hyperbolic climate alarmism.

Eco-Extremism Promoted in an English Primary School

Guido has this dismal news:

'Primary School Pushing 'Extinction Rebellion' Propaganda to 7-year-olds'

He writes:
'Voters in Kent will be pleased to discover that their hard-earned taxes have been going on promoting extremist group Extinction Rebellion to children as young as 7. Here’s Ramsgate Arts Primary School asking parents and teachers to take part in a “climate justice” printing session with their new art teacher, who will teach pupils how to decorate their clothes with slogans and symbols from a radical far-leftdoomsday cult hell-bent on the wholesale destruction of the global economy. Even the new eco-Gove would think twice before putting that in the National Curriculum…

“Our new art teacher Karen Vost will be printing Extinction Rebellion climate justice symbols and messages on clothes if you or your children would like to learn to print and learn more about climate change please pop along and meet Karen.”

An art teacher indoctrinating children into a radical cult making claims about human extinction too extreme for even climate scientists to support. All paid for by you…'

Dreadful.

Even Young Germans are Seeing Through the Climate Scaremongering

As published on Pierre Gosselin's site No Tricks Zone

He writes about it as follows:

'What follows today is really quite cool, and highly encouraging in a country known for lockstep thought.

Over the past months we’ve seen great media hype in Germany surrounding climate alarmist youngsters like Greta, FFF and more recently Rezo, who have played major roles in stirring up a lot of climate hysteria, all aided and abetted by the established media.

But apparently in Germany there are a few young, hip persons pushing back on all the climate hype and hysteria with their own videos that have since gone viral.

“Join the Skeptical Movement”

The latest video comes from young German teen Naomi Seibt, who has decided to think for herself and check what’s really behind the climate “science” and hysteria.'

That's her video above, at the start of this post.  Pierre also reports on another young person striking back against the scaremongers' dogma:

Pierre: 'Another spectacularly successful climate hysteria skeptical video was recently produced by German JasonHD on May 24th. In it he takes down climate alarmist and leftist political agitator Rezo (mentioned above) point by point.

JasonHD dismantles the “manipulations and untruths concerning climate change”.'

See the original post for more details of each video.  They are encouraging for those of us concerned about the indoctrination and brainwashing of youngsters.  Every confirmation that the climate scare brainwashing does not fool all of them all of the time is good news.

Teachers! - please don't teach climate alarm fallacies. Arctic Sea Ice and Polar Bears Section

Susan Crockford is one scientific specialist who has hit back at the Climate Crisis Science Establishment with many excellent posts, papers, and books.  Recently, she published:

'10 fallacies about Arctic sea ice & polar bear survival: teachers & parents take note'

Here are the 10 - see her post for more details on each:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. ‘Sea ice is to the Arctic as soil is to a forest‘. False: this all-or-nothing analogy is a specious comparison. 

2. Polar bears need summer sea ice to survive.  False: polar bears that have fed adequately on young seals in the early spring can live off their fat for five months or more until the fall, whether they spend the summer on land or the Arctic pack ice.

3. Ice algae is the basis for all Arctic life. Only partially true: plankton also thrives in open water during the Arctic summer, which ultimately provides food for the fish species that ringed and bearded seals depend upon to fatten up before the long Arctic winter.

4. Open water in early spring as well as summer ice melt since 1979 are unnatural and detrimental to polar bear survival. False: melting ice is a normal part of the seasonal changes in the Arctic.

5. Climate models do a good job of predicting future polar bear habitat. False: My recent book, The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened, explains that the almost 50% decline in summer sea ice that was not expected until 2050 actually arrived in 2007, where it has been ever since (yet polar bears are thriving).

6. Sea ice is getting thinner and that’s a problem for polar bears.  False: First year ice (less than about 2 metres thick) is the best habit for polar bears because it is also the best habitat for Arctic seals.

7. Polar bears in Western and Southern Hudson Bay are most at risk of extinction due to global warming. False: Ice decline in Hudson Bay has been among the lowest across the Arctic.

8. Breakup of sea ice in Western Hudson Bay now occurs three weeks earlier than it did in the 1980s. False: Breakup now occurs about 2 weeks earlier in summer than it did in the 1980s.

9. Winter sea ice has been declining since 1979, putting polar bear survival at risk. Only partially true: while sea ice in winter (i.e. March) has been declining gradually since 1979 (see graph below from NOAA), there is no evidence to suggest this has negatively impacted polar bear health or survival, as the decline has been quite minimal.

10. Experts say that with 19 different polar bear subpopulations across the Arctic, there are “19 sea ice scenarios playing out“ (see also here), implying this is what they predicted all along. False: In order to predict the future survival of polar bears, biologists at the US Geological Survey in 2007 grouped polar bear subpopulations with similar sea ice types (which they called ‘polar bear ecoregions,’ see map below).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given that polar bears have been promoted as being under acute threat from our CO2 emissions, there will be many teachers using them as attention-getters in lessons on climate change.  Here's hoping that they would not want to mislead their pupils.  After all, many are being scared witless as it is, and if that is due to duff (or probably more commonly, inadequate) information that would be quite a shameful thing.  As Crockford notes in her title, parents should also be keeping their eyes on this.