We know that children in the UK have been
frightened by materials on climate change.
We know that the mass media in the UK have produced or relayed
'climate porn' for many years.
We know that the UK government issued the reprehensible, and frightening, DVD 'An Inconvenient Truth' to schools in 2007, along with
guidance on how to make the most of it.
We know that in 2009 the UK government funded and promoted a
frightening tv ad with imagery apparently designed to attract and disturb children.
We know that a
scary movie involving children was used during the opening of the Copenhagen climate conference in December 2009.We know that the UK government funded absurd, and scary,
nursery rhyme posters on climate for which it was rebuked in 2010 by the Advertising Standards Agency.
We know that
art exhibitions for climate propaganda have been promoted by scary imagery, and even individuals have produced
scary movies to help their climate cause.
We know that various groups have produced more
professional scary movies and
adverts viewable by children, or, in the case of the ugly 10:10 movie
'No Pressure', with the brutal murder of children as one of the dramatic devices to urge conformance to the party line on climate.
We know that
games and cartoons have been produced to scare children about their 'carbon footprint'.
We know that
various initiatives on climate change aimed at schools are in place, and are concerned to achieve 'action' of one kind or another, but mostly pressure on parents to toe the party line on climate and the desired 'behaviour change' as per the prescriptions and analyses pushed by the IPCC.
We know that schools are being pushed into seeking to create
'little climate activists'.
We know that the
head of the IPCC has identified children as a key political target.
So it is not unreasonable to speculate that scary climate movies may be shown to children in schools in the UK.
But evidence of how much and how often does not seem to exist.
The journalist Leo Hickman has had several
pieces recently on the possibility that scary videos are being used in schools to advance the cause of climate alarmism (aka 'CAGW', 'climate change', 'sustainability', 'climate disruption'). This was triggered by a remark by
Johnny Ball, who built up a considerable reputation for sharing his enthusiasm for mathematics on tv programmes and talks for schoolchildren. In more recent years he has taken up the cause of defending children from climate scaremongering. This, of course, is to invite the wrath of the greens. So it is all the more remarkable that a CO2-alarmed correspondent in a CO2-alarmed newspaper has sought to expose as unacceptable the kind of attacks on his reputation which Ball has reported.
Hickman reports Ball as asserting that a movie talking of an unliveable planet by 2050 has been shown in schools. And, to his credit,
Hickman pursues this. First he appealed to his readers to provide any examples of such a movie being shown in schools, and he received none. He also checked back with Ball, who could not give further details. And then he checked with the Department for Education (DfE).
The good news here is
first of all that no examples were sent to him, other than reference to Gore's reprehensible 'An Inconvenient Truth'. This may be due to the nature of the Guardian readership, a paper which gave
a generous plug to the 'No Pressure' video. But, on the other hand, it
may be due to such videos being rarely shown.
The second piece of good news lies in the response Leo Hickman obtained from the DfE (my emphases added):
"Keen to get the definitive position on this, I asked the Department for Education (DfE) to clarify the situation regarding the showing of ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ in schools. It said that in March, 2007, the following email was sent to all secondary schools announcing that the film, as part of a larger educational pack, was being sent out, but that schools could opt out if they wished.
Then, after the court case in October, 2007, updated guidance was emailed to schools in December, 2007. But that was 2007. What about today? A DfE spokeswoman said it is very unlikely any school is still using this educational pack containing An Inconvenient Truth because teachers are warned on the website that this is old teaching material and could be out-of-date. She said no other climate change-related film has been distributed to schools by the department since 2007. She added:
We are awaiting to hear more about the National Curriculum review, which will look at all aspects of the curriculum, and will know more then about where teaching on climate change will fit – currently it comes more under the science curriculum, it may well still be [following the review]."
Should we be pleased, or remain cynical? The alarmists and their strategists may well have decided that the 'scare the children' tactic has backfired on them, or merely that they always need something new to keep the scare bubbling over in the political class. So perhaps we shall be spared further shocking, blatant, scaremongering materials. Perhaps, they will gamble that there has been enough of that, that 'CO2 as a source of impending catastrophe' can be treated as a given, or pushed to one side, while superficially more positive messages about 'sustainability' will provide the new banners in their relentless campaign against humanity and industrial progress. Time will tell. In the meantime, the numerous groups set up to tap into climate education funds, or win donations from climate scaremongering, or trade in carbon credits, or secure influence over governments through 'environmentalism', or pursue any advantage based on the notion that we face a clear and present danger from rising CO2 levels, will not go away overnight.
It may be merely that the presentation of misleading or frightening materials on climate to children has entered a more subtle phase.
