MOMania

By Jesse's Girl

April 22, 2008 7:31 AM | Link to this

This is pretty cut and dry for me. If you want sex ed to be taught at home, fine. But this is something far different. This has such a huge potential to nurture analytical and scientific thinkers here! Absolutely we should teach this in school. You can disagree with Gore’s movie until you are blue in the face. But its not about sex and religion…so when are the whiners going to stop and think? This arm of education can spark a passion in your child for learning! Whether you agree with global warming and the need to be more proactive for the environment or not….this is a no-brainer.

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 7:39 AM | Link to this

Things have gotten completely out of control when information is to be censored.

Education is about learning. Keeping any information from students is not benefiting anyone. Whyc censor “An Inconvenient Truth?” It is just a documentary about the environment and can be a useful learning tool.

Overly zealous people that hate Gore, or hate what ever get in the way of others learning everything possible. Let people learn everything and then make up their own minds!

By Momofthree

April 22, 2008 7:53 AM | Link to this

It’s not that showing “An Inconvenient Truth” is in itself, inappropriate. But it is inappropriate to present the movie as scientific fact without fairly bringing other points of view into the discussion.

My understanding from articles on this subject are that the movie isn’t being used to promote discussion of environmental issues in classrooms — but rather as a scientific fact that is not up for debate. That is inappropriate — as it would be for any issue. And that type of “teaching” doesn’t create analytical and scientific thinkers. It creates classrooms full of children unable to think for themselves.

By Stephanie

April 22, 2008 7:57 AM | Link to this

I think Gore’s film brings needed attention to our stewardship of our resources. However, some of his science has been proved false. No doubt, we should care for our planet. However, is it fair for our schools to use their influence on a captive audience (our children)? Educate my child. Stay out of politics.

By Ebaby

April 22, 2008 7:57 AM | Link to this

I remember learning about endangered whales and recycling from the Weekly Reader when I was in school. This seems like the modern variety of environmental accountability. I think this goes hand-in-hand with teaching cultural diversity and tolerance. You may not agree with it- but chances are you will be faced with it and will need to know what it is.

By momtoAlex&Max

April 22, 2008 7:59 AM | Link to this

I am a bit torn about this issue. On one hand, I am proud that my son is environmentally aware (yeah it’s a word!) largely due to his school’s efforts. On the other hand, I too felt pressured by him to do things that only increase my load, like recycling. My solution? I put him in charge of the recycling! It works wonders actually.

He feels important, he is contributing to the household chores, he’s doing his part to help the environment, and it’s one less thing I have to worry about.

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 8:05 AM | Link to this

Censoring Gore’s movie isn’t the answer.

Even if a school wants to “advocate” Gore’s position on the environment, at least that is some information the student can learn. If parents recognize that part of their child’s education is lacking (the other side of Gore’s issue), then they can educate them at home.

Again, censorship isn’t the answer.

By momtoAlex&Max

April 22, 2008 8:06 AM | Link to this

@ momofthree, yes thank you. I could not exactly verbalize what was bothering me about it, but that is it. I agree with you on that one. I am not sure is as cut and dried as Gore led us to believe in his movie. In fact, I read an article very recently written by one of the weather persons of 11 Alive that talked about balancing talks about global warming. According to him, it’s not as much a disaster as we are being led to believe. I’ll try to find the link and post it here later on today.

By Ebaby

April 22, 2008 8:07 AM | Link to this

Speaking of environmentl issues, etc. I have practically stopped using the plastic grocery bags all together. I thought it would be difficult at first, but its actually much easier on me. Now I dont have to figure out what to do with all those annoying plastic bags in the house. (I recycled the ones that I still had around the house).

By Momofthree

April 22, 2008 8:44 AM | Link to this

Just Me — I don’t think Theresa mentioned anything about censorship at all. I’m certainly not arguing for censorship.

I just think if you’re going to introduce a topic (especially one as heated as this can be), you should actually address it from all sides. To do otherwise is irresponsible to the children you teach.

MomtoAlex&Max — Thanks. I read something similar about the president or creator of the Weather Channel taking issue with the idea of global warming as well.

Ebaby — Those reusable Publix bags really are great. I like them because they are stronger and can hold much more than the plastic bags — and I don’t have to deal with all of that rubbish after a big trip to the grocery.

By momtoAlex&Max

April 22, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this

I found the link right away. Written by weatherman Paul Osmond.

http://www.11alive.com/weather/columnist/blogs/blog_entry.aspx?storyid=113659

It’s not linked (can’t figure that out), just copy and past.

By HB

April 22, 2008 8:48 AM | Link to this

The problem here is there is a misconception that there is a scientific debate when there is only a political one. There is overwhelming evidence that climate change is happening and that human activity is a major part of the problem. The scientific community is in almost unanimous agreement on this (and have been for a long time), with only a very small minority saying it is happening, but perhaps won’t be so bad or perhaps not caused by human action.

This is not something to believe in or not. We’re not talking about faith — this is scientific fact and should be presented as such. It would be irresponsible to present arguments against climate change because that would imply that a scientific debate exists with a significant nmber of scientists supporting the idea that it is not occuring. I understand that a lot of people feel that teaching it as fact is choosing sides and bringing politics to school, but actually, the opposite is true. Presenting the “other side” which is not scientifically supported would be political.

By Jesse's Girl

April 22, 2008 8:49 AM | Link to this

I for one consider recycling a part of my regular day. It doesn’t increase my “load”. As much I look forward to your comments MomtoAlexandMax..its that kind of attitude that makes it neccessary to use this kind of educational tool. Our attitudes have to change. We have basically gone down to one car….with Mr Jesse traveling so much, we really only need one. In fact…we are going this weekend to trade my SUV for a Hybrid Accord or Camry. We will definitely be giving up space and blood may be shed in the back seat having 3 kids side by side….but its worth it. Now I realize that everyone can’t get a new car….but its things like recycling what you bring into your home anyway that really matters.

I think this falls into the “gotta learn it” category. Just like learning Spanish…due to it becoming as common place as English. Our world is changing and our children will become the stewards of it…..we should at least educate them to be the most effective stewards we can.

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 8:51 AM | Link to this

Have schools gone into advocacy: They’ve been there. Whether it be evolution or global warming, the schools have been advocating issues for DECADES that fly in the face of proven, logical science.

Is it a bad thing: I don’t mind anyone presenting illogical ideas, as long as they also present the ones that logic dictates are correct. As in: If the earth is supposed to be warming, why have global temperatures FALLEN for the past decade??

We are creating a generation indoctrinated into environmentalism. When you begin placing animal life over human life in your list of priorities, you have gone too far. And most of these ‘environmentalists’ have done just that.

Where should it be taught: As with anything else, at the home. For any controversial issue that the school chooses to preach, it should be forced to present both sides with equal passion and time.

The line between education and advocacy is thin, but present. Specifically, when one side of an issue dominates, you have moved from education into advocacy.

But, schools have been indoctrination centers for as long as I’ve been associated with them, starting in the late 80s as a student. And I’m sure they were before that as well.

As far as showing An Inconvenient Truth: The only thing inconvenient about it is that much of it has been PROVEN FALSE. Therefore, why any school would be allowed to present it as anything other than fiction is beyond me.

But, I’ll throw its supporters a bone: Show Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed and support it with equal vigor as you do An Inconvenient Truth, and I’ll support you showing both. Just make sure you actually EDUCATE and do not INDOCTRINATE on either issue.

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 8:57 AM | Link to this

On censorship:

Again, schools have been in this business for DECADES. They censor anything that does not agree with the political agenda of the ruling party, and that goes in either direction. (And the Repulicrats and Democans have FAR more in common than either would like you to believe.)

By sally

April 22, 2008 8:57 AM | Link to this

Sure schools can teach about being environmentally conscious. It’s kind of hard for the kids to take it seriously if the cafeteria uses disposable dishes and silverware!

By Jesse's Girl

April 22, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this

So true, Sally….so true! A science teacher in Paulding County is paying for her entire class to go see Ben Stein’s movie! How cool is that. I think there is room in the classroom for both of these ideals. Our kids are being stifled at every turn in schools. I think its ridiculous to disregard something as critical as environmental education…as well as God.

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 9:14 AM | Link to this

Um, Jeff, not sure if you know this, but evolution and the greenhouse effect are real science. The problem surfaces only when people want schools to present fiction to students as if they are real (creationism comes to mind). Yes, I opened this can of worms here because it is a mistake for the educated to hide from the crazy overly zealous people that want to advocate fiction.

The greenhouse effect does exist. Evolution does exist. These are science. Present what is real in school. Leave fiction for the crazy parents to do at home if they want.

By Jesse's Girl

April 22, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this

The gradual rise and fall of global temps is directly related to El Nino and La Nina. But the degree of these two Pacific currents are a result of our global health. There cannot be an intelligent argument without both sides. I am simply saying that having environmental education in the schools makes sense. Its not like we are taking away the parents’ right to speak to their children about penises and vaginas here! We are talking about teaching our kids to take care of the only planet we have….its about respect and responsibility.

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this

Jessie’s Girl I agree that all sides of an issue should be give, IF THEY ARE REAL AND NOT FICTION!

Do you think that the road runner’s actions should be taught in physics. He was able to defy many of Newton’s Laws. Should students be exposed to the other sides of the issue rather than just Newton’s side?

What’s the difference??????

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 9:28 AM | Link to this

JM:

Show me a non-living organism that EVER evolved into a living being….

Show me a SINGLE ‘evolution’ that resulted in information GAIN. (Speciation results in information LOSS, but to create a completely new organism there needs to be information GAIN.)

As far as global ‘warming’ (er, cooling):

Prove that what we are currently seeing is anything more than normal fluctuations that the earth goes through every few thousand years.

Heck, I’d be (somewhat) satisfied if you could actually show the earth WARMING!!!! (Over the past decade, earth temperatures have actually FALLEN, contrary to what the global ‘warming’ alarmists would have you believe.)

By Jesse's Girl

April 22, 2008 9:38 AM | Link to this

Calm yourself Justme. The road runner was DRAWN. Kids know better..I mean really. Now…judging from your tone, you are no great lover of Biblical content. And I will not get into a discussion with you regarding this except to say that as humans…we are simply not evolved enough to embrace both creationism and evolution together. For me, this is where faith enters the picture.

Now…I would love…extoll even…the virtues of both being taught to my children in the classroom. I would also like for people to see that environmental education has no political agenda as far as the classroom goes. Its a matter of teaching your children…in and out of school…to appreciate what has been entrusted to them. Recycling and taking care of our planet should be something we all do…not argue the importance of.

By Momofthree

April 22, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

HB said, “The problem here is there is a misconception that there is a scientific debate when there is only a political one.

I agree with that sentence, but have to disagree with the rest of HB’s statement. The scientific debate is being dwarfed by the political debate.

It is not just a political debate for those who disagree with the Gore movie’s conclusions. It’s very much a political debate for those who agree wholeheartedly with the former Vice President.

The Earth’s climate is always changing — on THAT there is scientific accord. It heats and cools on a cyclical basis and has done for millions of years.

It’s the human factor that raises the political issue, and on that, HB, there is disagreement — real, scientific and growing disagreement.

A political statement is one that dismisses opposition to your views as insignificant or coming from a very small minority — and therefore not worth even considering.

Again, if we want to educate our children, we will present them with all arguments and let them decide for themselves. If we want to create a generation of sheep, then we will ignore anything that goes against our current beliefs and present those beliefs as “scientific fact”.

My children may very well end up on the opposite side of the political fence than me on a whole host of issues — and that’s okay with me as long as their decisions are educated ones.

By fk

April 22, 2008 10:01 AM | Link to this

Sally: You make an excellent point regarding the use of plastic utensils. Pehaps a good experiment or classroom lesson would be to see which is the more ecologically friendly & socially responsible means of feeding a school full of students—-the use of plastic utensils by thousands of school children vs. the number of times an industrial dishwashing machine is run for thousands of students, at the correct water temp and drying heat/steam settings? The health dept. mandates this as that is what disinfects the dishes, etc. How much and what type of energy is expensed and how much water is used…and at what monetary cost? Which would be the better choice, environmentally speaking? And, is it cost effective? Because the bottom line is usually what wins out. I don’t know the answer, but there may be a reason why the school uses plastic, other than convenience, health concerns, for instance. Ever notice the number of disposable tools in a medical examining room?

By Momofthree

April 22, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this

Jessie’s Girl — I don’t think teaching the value of recycling or conservation, etc. is bad at all, and I think that is appropriate for schools and parents to introduce to those concepts to children.

But the environmentalism movement has gone far beyond simple conservation and recycling issues. It is creating an environment, if you will, where humans are the bad guys — and anyone who isn’t seen as helping the movement is seen as destroying the Earth.

For some, environmentalism has become just as much a religion as any traditional religion. They are well past promoting responsible stewardship of our planet and are trying to force everyone to drink their Kool-Aid. I do have a problem with that. I would simply like my kids to know what’s in that Kool-Aid before they chug it down.

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 10:19 AM | Link to this

Momofthree@10:10:

Amen, and AMEN!

By Jesse's Girl

April 22, 2008 10:21 AM | Link to this

I have always liked the idea of kids bringing their own plates, bowls and utensils to school. There are websites that sell them in bulk that also come with bags to keep them in. The schools could supply the food and drinks, but the kids would trash the left overs and put their “stuff” back in their bag to take home and get washed. We stopped using sandwich bags as well…..the Container Store has some great options for sack lunches. Our kids use recylcled containers for all of their school food. NOw, if I can just come up with a way to keep freezer burn off my meat so I can stop using freezer bags….that’d be great!

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

Jessie’s Girl Yes, faith does enter the picture when discussing creationism. And, schools don’t teach faith, Churches do. And, it is my understanding that there is a little something about separation between Church and State in the constitution?

Jeff If you are asking those type of questions, it is apparent that you need to go back to freshman biology and relearn what evolution means. How can you (or anyone) have such a stance when you don’t understand what the heck you are arguing???? You also need to return to sophomore physical science class and relearn what the greenhouse effect is - how it works, etc.

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

JG:

What kind of length of time are you looking at? Couple of days? A week? A month?

I found that the plastic containers sealed tight and encased in saran wrap works pretty good for about a week. (This was back when I was single and cooking all my lunches on Sundays so I could chill out when I got home during the week!)

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

JustMe:

Actually, you need to learn what evolution is.

That speciation occurs is in fact scientific, observable, and generally accepted as fact.

MACRO-evolution, however, the theory concerning origins of life and the idea that one species can evolve into a HIGHER classification, is what has never been proven.

Take a virus, for example: You can show - in many cases - in a matter of SECONDS speciation happening, where the virus mutates into a different form.

HOWEVER, you can NOT show that said virus will EVER become a single TWO CELLED organism - much less anything more complex.

Heck, Darwin himself acknowledged that if you could find a structure of such irreducible complexity that it could not be broken down any further, his theory was toast.

To such a challenge, I present the human eye.

By Jesse's Girl

April 22, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

JustMe…..I am in no way saying that schools should teach faith. I was simply stating that since I lack the ability to reconcile the two ideals logically in my head….I don’t. I believe both happened and that God will sort the details for me when He is good and ready. Faith allows me to do that. Schools should not treat this as another “Cobb County Evolution” argument. But I do think that as institutions who are engaging the minds of the very children that we will one day turn this planet over to…they are obligated to give them the tools to take care of it. Conservation is not a 4 letter word people.

By Judy

April 22, 2008 11:24 AM | Link to this

My biggest complaint is that my child comes home and repeats all the info he has learned regarding saving the planet. I am on board with most of it so it isn’t a suprise. What is a huge suprise is that the school sends out dozens of one-sided pieces of paper weekly. Whether they are ads from local businesses, ads from county parks, info from the school - USE BOTH SIDES of the paper.

Or better yet, send them home via email or post them online with one half-page note coming home saying - CHECK our website for information on the following.

While they sell water (in bottles) and milk in cartons, neither are recycled at the school. Instead they are tossed away.

I guess I am old school - your children do what you do not always what you say. If the schools want to set a positive attitude towards the environment, get on board. Instead giving the kids advice to go home and give the parents - live the advice.

By 46 Chromosomes

April 22, 2008 11:26 AM | Link to this

Only in the South, the beacon of great intellectual thought, do people debate Evolution. Incredible. There is no global warming, the world is flat, and all of our problems began when they removed God out of the classroom, and God wants you to vote Republican too. I think I now understand why we’re 48th in education and UGA has never produced any Nobel Laureates.

I think it’s great that environmentalism is taught in schools. We take the class outside in August and look at our smoggy Atlanta skies with no blue color and explain the cause. What is encouraging is that so many children and young adults “get it” which is a sign of the future. We take our kids into the garage and crank up the car with the door closed for one minute and have them take a whiff; it drives home the point of our atmosphere and what we are doing to it. I think it’s great children are being taught to recycle, learn more about preserving the earth and are encouraged to help take care of it. Kids often times are smarter than their parents on many issues!

By new mom

April 22, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this

As a former elementary school teacher, I have some experience with what happens to schools around earth day. Christmas and Easter have been eliminated, there is no mention of any religion or holiday anymore, but when it gets close to April 22nd, it’s SCHOOLS GONE WILD. Every lesson plan, field trip, etc. must revolve around earth day. In response to the poster who said this isn’t as if it’s a debate about religion or sex in the classroom, I respectfully disagree. Earth day and environmentalism as a whole has become the religion of choice for the public school system, and their religious fervor is frightening.

We happen to personally recycle where we can, use seventh generation products, and donate or garage sale old items rather than throwing away. However, I don’t think it’s the government’s place to use school children, who aren’t able to research every side of an issue, to practically brainwash to a particular viewpoint. This former public school teacher is saving her pennies so her 7 month-old daughter will go to a private school :)

By new mom

April 22, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this

To clarify my post, there are a multitude of reasons that we want our daughter to go to private school, it’s not just because of the earth day hysteria. The biggest is that I have seen the public schools innerworkings firsthand, and I want more for our daughter. Perhaps that comment is for another day, another blog….

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this

Jeff So then, I have a question for you - oh great all-knowing one.

Humans have never visited many places in our Universe. We have sent probes to various planets in solar system. However, scientists say that we know the gases that make up bodies outside of our solar system. Do you also claim that they lie about that?

Also, many/most asteroids are not seen once they leave our solar system. Yet, they do re-appear on a cyclic basis. Scientist claim to know where they go outside of our solar system. Do you also think they lie here?

You need to return to school and understand the nature of science (how science works). I would bet that you don’t know the difference between a scientific theory and a law, as well. Just a guess.

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this

JM:

Ever heard the theory of the multiverse??

Science can BARELY detect it…

But mathematically we can prove that reality as we know it has something like 22 dimensions - not just the 4 that humans can detect. (Length, Width, Height, Time).

Who’s to say what is happening on those other dimensions?

But here’s the kicker:

Just as a being who only existed in 2D (length and width) could not detect an object ABOVE it, no matter how advanced this being’s ‘science’, so humans are also similarly limited in regards to the remaining 18 dimensions. SCIENCE, no matter how advanced, will NEVER be able to detect a being on even the FIFTH dimension.

So how can science be trusted? It lacks the power to give us the very information it claims it provides!

By Jesse's Girl

April 22, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this

And so it begins…..

By 46 Chromosomes

April 22, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this

Hey Jeff, you’re a bright guy - you must realize that 1+1=2 is a theory as well! Nice comments, totally off subject.

Can anyone provide me with a lot of examples of “how” the schools are brainwashing our children for environmentalism?

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

JG:

So what begins?

I’m simply stating the obvious: Science claims that it is the final authority on ‘reality’, yet it CANNOT be, because it lacks the very power it claims it has!

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

46:

Actually, the general assumption of 1 + 1 = 2 can be mathematically proven in most cases - though there are some branches of math in which 1 + 1 = 0, or even 1 + 1 = 1!

As you can probably see, I am more of a mathematician than a scientist, and I find that MATH - not science - is the most powerful tool humans have at their disposal.

By nurse&mother

April 22, 2008 12:34 PM | Link to this

&FK- What disposable medical equipment are you refering to? Gauze, cotton tip applicators, tongue depressors etc. or disposable speculums, metal equipment etc. If you are referring to gauze, q-tips, plastic ear speculums, those are things that cannot be cleaned and resterilized. Certainly metal vaginal speculums, medical instruments can be cleaned and sterilized.

I will agree that when it comes to vaginal deliveries, there is so much waste! Lots of paper drapes, plastic buckets etc. that cannot be reused and are just thrown away. It’s a shame that towels cannot be used to drape the patients legs. I understand that some areas need that sterile drape, but you would be amazed at all the waste that comes in these kits. Also, it is possible to have metal buckets that could be cleaned and sterilized, but that would be too much work, now wouldn’t it (dripping with sarcasm)?

By 46 Chromosomes

April 22, 2008 12:36 PM | Link to this

I would like to hear some specific examples of evironmental brainwashing of our children in school. I really don’t have too many complaints about my child’s education.

By Scooter

April 22, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this

It is a slippery slope that can, and will lead to indoctrination by politicians with little background in environmental sciences. Because after all, free people cannot be trusted as stewards of the environment and therefore must be controlled through legislation and regulatory controls. Once the power of governmental control is taught as beneficial by schools, the next generation will further allow their liberties to be restricted for what they have been taught is the “common good”.

Are the schools teaching kids that government can infinitely continue to insulate people from the forces of natural selection with entitlement programs. And, our government, responsible and trustworthy as they are, can keep the planet in a static state as they also expedite the overpopulation problem - overpopulation is the crisis that vote buying politicians and society won’t touch with a ten foot pole.

One more generation of this teaching and we will truly be living in “Mother America”. Mother America makes politicians strong and individuals weak. We need to wake up to politicians trying to get the power to chase undefined and arbitrary goals, because it will be an endless disaster that perpetuates itself.

By new mom

April 22, 2008 12:51 PM | Link to this

46, I unfortunately don’t have time to give you ‘a lot’ of examples (the 7 mth old!) but the main problem I had was not the teaching of science and the environment, but the ‘humans are bad’ and ‘go home and make your parents do _’ teaching. The same schools who teach so passionately about the environment during ‘earth week’ are the ones who only care about meetings and test scores. They are fine with you teaching, as long as you don’t offend any child, hurt anyone’s feelings, or forget to check your email. I have lots of issues with public schools and their priorities (and lack of priorities) but it always struck me odd that the only subject they cared about me teaching was the environment. Forget the multiplication tables—too hard, not necessary, not every child will be able to learn them.

By Jesse's Girl

April 22, 2008 1:00 PM | Link to this

Why do some of you have a problem with conservation being taight in the classroom? No one is suggesting that we start a Wicca group at all schools….worshipping Mother Nature and the like. I for one, am simply saying that teaching our children to be more conscientious in regards to their planet can result in nothing but good things. Some of you are putting too complicated a spin on all of this.

By Stacey

April 22, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this

My son’s school has taught him to “sell” us on a lot of matters but so far environmentalism hasn’t come up. I’ve made small changes such as switching to energy efficient light bulbs. We recycle newspaper, magazines, detergent bottles and things like that. I also use my plastic grocery bags for my day-to-day garbage and only use trash bags for heavy duty stuff. I rarely buy recycled stuff simply because (IMO) it doesn’t make sense to pay three times as much for something the label claims it’s made with recycled material.

By 46 Chromosomes

April 22, 2008 1:30 PM | Link to this

It appears this might be more of a political argument rather than indoctrination via the school system. If the left embraces something, its demonized by the right, and vis versa.

Teddy Roosevelt was probably the biggest environmentalist of them all - and a Republican. I wonder what TR would have to say about Earth Day and the Environment movement today?

Schools do use indoctrination: after all, remember the Pledge of Allegiance?

By fk

April 22, 2008 1:40 PM | Link to this

Forget the math. Give examples. My son’s elementary school promoted recycling. However, the school’s biggest fundraiser was gift wrap…and it was not made from recycled paper. They sold tons of it…$50K++. Oh, the irony of it all! That was several years ago, though, so I’m sure the paper company has become a bit more environmentally responsible. And, what about carpool lines? The carpool line was always backed up into the road, as far back as the intersection, backing up traffic along another road to a yet another busy intersection. Wonder what that air quality was like?

n&m: My point was that certain institutions use plastic as plastic is sometimes more hygenic to use rather than to sterilize improperly, or that it might be completely impossible to sterilize. I wasn’t picking on any profession, I was simply stating that sometimes paper/plastic might be a better alternative, even though not always eco-friendly. Sorry if this opinion upset you, but it’s just that, an opinion.

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this

46:

You’re saying the exact same thing I’ve been saying all along about this topic in general:

Schools have been Indoctrination Camps for DECADES. It all depends on the ruling party as to exactly what values are being indoctrinated. Problem is, over the past 20 or so years in particular, there are come to be precisely ZERO difference between the Republicrats and Democans.

By Sarafina

April 22, 2008 1:43 PM | Link to this

Schools teaching environmentalism is a good thing… no it’s a great thing. And if parents are so out of touch with changes and what needs to be done for the health of the planet then their children are right to point out their errors. I am so tired of the idea that science is “theory”. This is the same argument applied to whether or not to teach evolution vs. creation. Get me as far away from you God-fearing, science-hating nuts as possible. If you don’t like the idea that global warming is happening and it is pretty much totally caused by irresponsible human action then you can just go sit with the folks who think no rock on earth is older than 4000 years. You folks scare me.

By Momofthree

April 22, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this

Jesse’s Girl — I don’t think people on here have a problem with CONSERVATION being taught in the classroom. But there is a difference between conservation and what is now being termed “environmentalism”.

For most people, conservation makes sense and is a choice they can make to help keep their environment clean and enjoyable for generations to come.

Despite what may have been noble intentions, environmentalism is fast becoming a fanatical movement. It is, in essence, Mother Nature worship as you said, and questioning those policies or ideas is tantamount to heresy.

Many “environmentalists” want to force everyone to do things their way — and their way is not limited to simply recycling or turning off your lights when you leave the room. There is no room for discussion or opposing points of view.

The question then becomes, as Theresa asked at the beginning…”Have schools gone beyond educating about the environment into advocacy? Are we creating a generation ready to be stewards for the planet or a generation indoctrinated into environmentalism?”

I think some people are arguing that stewardship has flown out the schoolhouse window in favor of environmentalism.

By 46 Chromosomes

April 22, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

Hello MomofThree: What exactally do the Environmentalists want to force you to do? Just curious….

By HB

April 22, 2008 2:24 PM | Link to this

*Despite what may have been noble intentions, environmentalism is fast becoming a fanatical movement. It is, in essence, Mother Nature worship as you said, and questioning those policies or ideas is tantamount to heresy.

Many “environmentalists” want to force everyone to do things their way — and their way is not limited to simply recycling or turning off your lights when you leave the room.*

By HB

April 22, 2008 2:30 PM | Link to this

Oops. Only half my post made it. The rest was, Could you provide examples of the fanatical, not-just-recycling, practices are being forced on students and families? I honestly have no idea what this would be.

By 46 Chromosomes

April 22, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this

With the results that Georgia schools have produced over the years, I doubt seriously that they are going to produce any type of movement for anything; the high school drop out rate in our state is 40%.

MomofThree, what would be and example of “tantamount to heresy” regarding Mother Earth Worship? I’ve read where the Southern Baptist Convention, the Catholic Church, Orthodox Church and many other mainstream denominations have recently embraced the Environmental movement and have equivocated that doing nothing is a sin. What is the example of heresy?

By FCM

April 22, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

Those grocery bags came in handy to stuff smelly diapers/pullups (disposable) when the children were that stage….No, I am not being sarcastic…I happily used the disposable diapers and got rid of them in those bags.

Recycling does make sense but why does it have to be such a PITA to do? How many different bins do I need litering my yard? Can we hire homeless or welfare folks to sort the trash later?

OK I am sure to be ‘trashed’ on this subject….However for the record, I think having a ‘green holiday’ is literally and figuratively for the birds.

Recycle from last week @ Diedre——how is it going? Did you do the callback yet? I had a 2md recently. I think I will get 3rd. Still hoping for a 2nd on a different company I sat with….

Keep your chin up and keep praying!

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this

Jeff Again, what you write LOUDLY screams that you don’t know how science works - the nature of science.

By AMY

April 22, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

HAPPY EARTH DAY EVERYBODY! NOW LET’S GO BURN SOME TIRES.

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 3:02 PM | Link to this

Jeff* If you are referring to the string theory…. there are many prominent scientists that doubt it is a scientific theory at all.

You see, it is part of the nature of science that a theory must be able to withstand some sort of test or experiment. String theory cannot (so far). Therefore, it is not a valid scientific theory.

Hmmm. That, in fact, is the same problem with creationism. One cannot test it or experiment on it. Plus, there is no direct evidence of it - other than peoples imagination and faith. So, it is invalid as a scientific theory.

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 3:12 PM | Link to this

JM:

Prove that you can experiment on macro-evolution.

You still haven’t given me a single piece of evidence from my earlier challenges.

If global warming and/ or evolution were true science, the examples I asked for earlier should be READILY available.

After all, these holes have been known for QUITE some time….

That the misguided still believe in evolution speaks FAR more to THEIR religion than anything a supporter of Intelligent Design does.

By 46 Chromosomes

April 22, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this

Numerous mainstream denominations embrace Evolution such as the Anglican Church and Lutherans - even the Greek and Russian Orthodox feel Evolution works with church doctrine. All of Biology is based on evolution. The Baptists and evangellicals have issues with science; not all denomiations agree.

What does this have to do with the subject at hand?

By catlady

April 22, 2008 3:36 PM | Link to this

No time for Earth Day or science or social studies. Gotta get ready/take/recover from the CRCT!

Get this: our town holds “Earth Day” celebration IN THE PARKING LOT OF A BIG BOX STORE! How is that for irony?

By for petes sake

April 22, 2008 3:40 PM | Link to this

I’ve been in the environmental business for 23 years and you people amaze me! Educate your children and they may live to see their grandchildren. Can it get any simplier folks?

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this

Jeff There is quite a lot of evidence to support evolution. Again, you need to re-take your high school freshman biology class and learn about what Darwin found and why he even came up with his theory. Since Darwin, there has been tons of evidence, (fossils, animals secluded on islands, etc.) that have been found to support Darwin’s theory.

Again, if you understood the nature of science, maybe you won’t be so tweeked out about it. A scientific theory is not something that never ever changes. It is something based on what we know so far, and have evidence to support.

There used to be a scientific theory that the Earth was flat. But, we discovered new evidence and now know that the particular theory doesn’t work/isn’t real.

You wrote ‘true science.’ That alone shows how ignorant you are as to what science is.

However, after these brief comments, it is apparent that you are one that is extremely stubborn and do not care to expand your mind but rather simply want to push your agenda on others.

Good luck to you.

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 3:56 PM | Link to this

Chromosomes Evolution specifically doesn’t relate to this subject. However, understanding how science works and what science is has everything to do with environmentalism (and evolution, the greenhouse effect, etc.).

Too many people don’t understand what science is at all. Many think that a “theory” graduates to become a “law.” That is just so not true. Many people that “theorys” and “laws” are something that never change. That is also not true.

If more people understood what science is and how it works, then there would likely be less confusion about environmentalism…. and less hostility towards science.

By 46 Chromosomes

April 22, 2008 4:03 PM | Link to this

E = MC2 is a theory which has never been tested from some little German dude.

I think Chamblee just voted to make all future construction Green compliant; first in the state to mandate Green building construction. I like that!

By Momofthree

April 22, 2008 4:15 PM | Link to this

46 and HB — First, I don’t believe that everyone who believes we should clean up the environment is a fanatic. But I do believe that environmentalism is a movement that is pushing a political agenda and that many of the followers of that movement see no room for discussion or disagreement. That’s fanaticism.

I used Jesse’s Girl’s term “Mother Earth worshipper” because I was responding to her post — though I do think there are those whose adherence to the environmental movement is as strong as others’ adherence to religious beliefs.

As for schools, I simply said that the issue people have with teaching environmentalism (vs. conservation) to children is that it’s often one-sided and not up for debate. They are forcing an agenda, as “A New Mom” said, where they are teaching students to take this information at face value and “go home and tell your parents to do _”. I have a problem with that — as I would with anyone telling my child to take any political position at face value.

As for examples… there are many examples of environmental leaders who complain about the carbon footprint countries, businesses and individuals leave when those same leaders don’t practice what they preach. How many times have you heard Gore and countless other artists/activists go on about the greenhouse gases airliners or SUVs emit — only to have those activists jump on a private plane or into a caravan of SUVs to get to their next speaking engagement/environmental concert?

But they feel it’s okay to legislate countries, businesses and individuals to change their driving habits, travel plans, their entire business model, etc.

Perhaps the biggest issue I have is that some of the advocacy groups state that if they think an organization is doing something detrimental to the environment, then it is up to that group to defend itself and prove that their actions are not harming the environment.

I certainly don’t want businesses or other groups out there destroying the environment, but I think that burden of proof statement makes it too easy for any group to force its agenda. If that’s the model, I could hire a lawyer and claim anyone is destroying the environment — without any proof on my part — and they would either have to submit to my will or pay to defend themselves.

By Jeff

April 22, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this

JM:

For someone claiming that I ‘do not know science’, you seem to be forgetting the primary fact of science:

It must be OBSERVABLE and REPEATABLE.

Macro evolution is neither.

Micro evolution - speciation - is the only thing about evolution theory that we can both agree is beyond contestation. It passes both tests.

The FACT of the matter is that macro evolution is just as much a religion as Christianity, buddhism, hinduism, or any of the others.

By Mike K

April 22, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

Prove that you can experiment on macro-evolution.

29 Evidences for Macroevoution

Note that there is a link in this article from someone who disputes some of the facts presented here, as well as a reply link to that author.

By JustMe

April 22, 2008 4:45 PM | Link to this

Jeff Um, no. That is not a primary “fact of science.” Again, you clearly display that you don’t know what science is or how it works.

And your use of the capitalized work “FACT” in your last paragraph even shows that you don’t know what the term “fact” means.

It is hard to have a battle of wits with someone as unarmed as you seem to be.

By HB

April 22, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this

See, I have no problem with kids learning good practices at school and going home and suggesting recycling, driving less, or using better light bulbs to their parents. To me, that’s like kids going home and saying, “We learned at school that smoking is bad for you. Please stop.” Or back in my day, when schools stressed the importance of always wearing seatbelts at a time when parents I knew said it wasn’t really necessary for short trips — just when we went out of town. I don’t see that as political — that’s teaching students facts and encouraging good practices.

If the school were to tell kids to urge their parents to support a mandatory seatbelt law, smoking ban, or emissions regulation, though, those would be political issues, and whether or not I agreed with the legislation, I would have a big problem with schools pushing that sort of specific political agenda. That climate change is happening and is largely due to human activity is fact. What the government should or should not do about it is politics, but I’m not aware of schools teaching such positions. Have you seen examples of this in schools?

By OhPleez

April 22, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this

YES, teach all kids about the environment. If Gore’s film irritates you, then show them something else. The fact is (whether your head is in the sand or not) that the world is being destroyed, and it is our kids who will deal with it, so they need to be aware now.

And for that mom who didn’t want to be told that fertilizer is bad for the environment, it is! No one except for you cares that your lawn is the greenest. In fact, most people now view green lawns the same as we see SUVS… as a sign that you are selfish and incredibly ignorant.

By 46 Chromosomes

April 22, 2008 5:06 PM | Link to this

I’ve been using the organic fertilizer for years; synthetic stuff has salt in it. Costs about the same, smells like poopy but works great!

By new mom

April 22, 2008 5:10 PM | Link to this

I think it needs to be stated again that most here on this blog don’t have a problem with teaching about the earth and the environment. The specific distinction here is the level which it’s being pushed on our kids, and (my biggest issue) that the schools don’t really seem to care whether kids can read or do math. It’s all about test scores, looking good, and Earth Day. Oh, and meetings. :)

By Tony

April 22, 2008 7:56 PM | Link to this

What schools do wrong is not allow debate. This is where true understanding of ideas is developed. It is not wrong to discuss environmental concerns. It is wrong to present a one-sided message. Helping students to think critically through a problem should be the goal. Strange thing, though. This is where parents really go berserk! As a science teacher I would want my students to evaluate an environment issue using scientific principles. For instance, the mother that was convinced to purchase the cloth shopping bags because they are reusable. Is there a real benefit to the environment? What about the economy? Were the cloth bags made in some sweat shop with children held as slave labor?

Debating and evaluating positions requires high level thinking. Students have to analyze and synthesize information. As I mentioned, this is where parents go berserk. Why? Because the child may develop rational thought and begin to question things at home. Especially concerning to parents is the questioning of religious beliefs. What they miss is an opportunity to discuss more deeply about beliefs and why those beliefs are important.

Finally, go ahead and show the very UNSCIENTIFIC movie, but do so in conjunction with real analysis. For instance, many of the images are computer generated graphics based on suppositions that are greatly exagerated. Let the teachers point out these issues and have a real discussion. The truth is the earth’s average temperature is rising. In context of the planet’s history, this has happened a number of times.

As humans we do a number of things that are harmful to Earth. To truly respect the our planet, we must learn about its systems and how they support life. Schools should help us with this. It is our job to educate children.

By Tony

April 22, 2008 8:02 PM | Link to this

A comment about faith, fiction, science, evolution, and other related statements posted today.

As a scientist, I have seen many evolutionists/Darwinists espouse the tenets with as much faith as I have seen from the religious folk toward God. They will speak with the fervor of an evangelist. And they are as opposed to the presentation of alternate views as the most fundamentalist of religions. Debate and analysis are needed rather than emotion.

By nurse&mother

April 23, 2008 9:06 AM | Link to this

@FK- I certainly wasn’t offended, I was just trying to see exactly what you were talking about. I see more waste in the hospital than in the doctor’s office. If you read my full post, you will see that I, in essence, was agreeing with you.

By juli

April 23, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

This all started by a child asking her mom to use reusable bags instead of plastic, and another noting about the pesticides used by the lawn service. But oh well, I am not surprised that comments like these can end up in such a tantrum in this country. Luckily, Europe and Asia are now in the lead changing their standards so their people do not eat plastic or drink fertilizer. The US market is having to follow suit, regardless of people who think it is their right to eat and drink poison. If they can’t be free unless they do as they are told by the propaganda of oil and chemical industries, I don’t see a reason for them to stop. Please wrap your houses with as much plastic as you want, and put a system of pipes under your lawn to drink water that has gone through it. I think it is a great idea!

By juli

April 23, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this

This all started by a child asking her mom to use reusable bags instead of plastic, and another noting about the pesticides used by the lawn service. But oh well, I am not surprised that comments like these can end up in such a tantrum in this country. Luckily, Europe and Asia are now in the lead changing their standards so their people do not eat plastic or drink fertilizer. The US market is having to follow suit, regardless of people who think it is their right to eat and drink poison. If they can’t be free unless they do as they are told by the propaganda of oil and chemical industries, I don’t see a reason for them to stop. Please wrap your houses with as much plastic as you want, and put a system of pipes under your lawn to drink water that has gone through it. In fact, why not move next to one of the majority of unlined landfills in the country to enjoy as much of it as possible? I think it is a great idea!

By nurse&mother

April 23, 2008 9:42 AM | Link to this

@Juli- I know of a Juli (spelled exactly the same way!!) Not too many of those around. I always take notice when I see someone with that name. BTW, you don’t happen to work in Chattanooga at a camera shop do you? If so, then I know you.

By JustMe

April 23, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this

Debate is encouraged, at least in my classroom. But, it is encouraged only using facts and not faith or fiction.

By wisemenmom

April 23, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this

As with most things taught at the local school, my concern is that there is no gray, just black and white. On a global level, the US is not the major polluter as we have been led to believe by the media. As with many things introduced at our local school, when we discuss it at our house, we preface with, although we don’t agree, you will be taught this…blah,blah,blah

By Michael

May 12, 2008 7:47 AM | Link to this

To the writer of the article / question at issue. I am positive that the British schools agreed to show the film ONLY with a disclaimer. The British (some court) pointed out many issues that were either completely false or misleading and points that had no scientific basis, but not proven to be true or false either way. I will look to try and find the story.