The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: How can I strengthen my students' awareness about climate change?  (Read 1087 times)

Offline ARWIN

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Global Warming is said to be inevitable, as the fruit of climate change. I've been in the teaching profession for almost seven years and every now and then I do incorporate that issue even if my subject is not Science. But it felt like I'am not making any impact to my students. I really need help by people who might know better than what I know. So please feel free to comment on this. Thank you :).


 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
You need to be very scientific about this.

"Global warming" has been pretty much abandoned as a slogan since none of the predictions has turned out to be correct.

Climate change seems to be inevitable. All the records show that the climate at any point on the planet has changed many times, in geological and in written history.

There being no consistently predictive mechanism for prehistoric climate change, nor any means of blaming the 11th-century cooling on human activity, the honest answer (and kids need a bit of honesty in their schooling, as they won't often come across it in adult life) is that the earth's climate is inherently chaotic but appears to be bounded, with rapid increases followed by slow decreases in temperature.

It's a good introduction to critical thinking to consider any such phrase as "the average temperature of the earth is hotter than it has ever been"  and ask kids "what does that mean?" and "how do they know?" - these are the important questions that must be asked before assigning blame, predicting the future, or even guessing the mechanism: is the data really kosher? Forensic science, the analysis of complex interactive systems, and making inferences from partial data, are all much more interesting than parsing Shakespeare.

But above all you must insist that it is all their fault, otherwise they will object to paying "green" taxes and having an unreliable electricity supply. Never mind the truth, the careers of many politicians and self-styled "climate scientists" depend on the gullibility of the electorate.
« Last Edit: 24/05/2016 20:08:26 by alancalverd »
 
The following users thanked this post: ARWIN

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4105
  • Thanked: 245 times
    • View Profile
As much as I respect alancalverd, I do disagree with him about this (and so do most climate scientists)...

The first thing is to distinguish weather and seasons from climate. You can't have one hot (or cold) day and call it climate change. You can't get a heavy snow cover or a dry summer and call it climate change. Due to the semi-regular Sunspot cycle (around 11 years), you must take an average over at least 10 years when defining a climate trend.

Random events like large volcanic eruptions can produce a measurable impact on the global weather for a year, and the El-Nino effect can affect the weather for several years. A 10-year average evens out these shorter-term fluctuations.

As Alan says, there are some well-known cyclic changes in climate; the Milankovitch Cycles define a range of changes that occur in Earth's orbit over periods of tens of thousands of years. These probably influence the start and end of the ice ages.

While humans have affected the ecology and climate for thousands of years, it was dwarfed by natural processes up to the Industrial Revolution. However, Industrial-Scale burning of fossil fuels has produced measurable increases in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere; these have been measurable since scientific measurements started in Hawaii in the 1950s. Less direct measures like air bubbles trapped in Antarctic snow extend this record back for thousands of years.

The extra dissolved CO2 slightly increases ocean acidity, and is expected to affect sea life which depends on shells constructed from Calcium Carbonate (which dissolves in more acidic conditions).

The increased CO2 in the atmosphere acts as a blanket to keep heat lower down in the atmosphere. The slowly increasing temperatures (on a human timescale) are a big problem for whole ecosystems, which can't easily move to cooler climates - especially since humans have fragmented the landscape with roads and cities.

The "Green" movement paints everything as a disaster, in an attempt to "guilt" everyone; people don't appreciate this. However, there are some good sides to it - if you live in Siberia or northern Canada, you would probably appreciate a few more degrees in temperature. If you are a Zika-carrying mosquito in the USA, you would really appreciate an extra degree or so in temperature. (see the guilt creeping in there?)

Animals and plants do undergo genetic changes to adapt to the climate, but this generally requires hundreds of generations in a large population for these changes to become effective. The changes are too rapid to allow changes on this timescale, so many species will become extinct.

The other issue is that human memory is too short to see the long-term changes.

So if your students have a choice of:
  • turning on the airconditioner, or opening the window: open the window.
  • leaving the lights on, or turning them off: turn them off.
  • Putting steel and aluminium in landfill vs recycling: Recycle.
  • Buying a monster truck, or a small sedan: buy the sedan.
  • Taking the train or driving yourself: Take the train.
  • Telcommuting, rather than driving to work: Telecommute (if that is practical in your industry).
  • One day, buying solar cells for their house: buy them (especially if battery storage prices come down).

There are less-regular patterns in the climate that are harder to explain - for example, the Sun's semi-regular cycle ceased during the 1600s, changing the Earth's climate. We have explanations for some of these, and not for others.

But the impact of humans has been clearer since the start of more scientific observations in the 1800s, and the larger impacts of humans since the 1800s.
 
The following users thanked this post: ARWIN

Offline agyejy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 210
  • Thanked: 22 times
    • View Profile
You need to be very scientific about this.

"Global warming" has been pretty much abandoned as a slogan since none of the predictions has turned out to be correct.

If we're being scientific then we should note that the entire idea that "Global warming" was first adopted and the abandoned by the scientific community in favor of climate change is demonstrably false:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-global-warming.htm


Mentions of Global Warming and Climate Change in books published in the US via Google books.


According to Google scholar climate change actually came first and has always been used by scientists more than global warming.

Quote
Climate change seems to be inevitable. All the records show that the climate at any point on the planet has changed many times, in geological and in written history.

Largely irrelevant:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm

Quote
There being no consistently predictive mechanism for prehistoric climate change, nor any means of blaming the 11th-century cooling on human activity, the honest answer (and kids need a bit of honesty in their schooling, as they won't often come across it in adult life) is that the earth's climate is inherently chaotic but appears to be bounded, with rapid increases followed by slow decreases in temperature.

Patently untrue. To be more specific there are some parts of the climate that are relatively random but we can easily tell when these things happen because we have relatively good and predictive descriptions of everything else.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Milankovitch.html <- Milakovitch cycles do a remarkably good job and predicting ice ages

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-models-intermediate.htm <- And climate models do a very good job at predicting future climate and even the impacts of events like volcanic eruptions





Quote
It's a good introduction to critical thinking to consider any such phrase as "the average temperature of the earth is hotter than it has ever been"  and ask kids "what does that mean?" and "how do they know?" - these are the important questions that must be asked before assigning blame, predicting the future, or even guessing the mechanism: is the data really kosher? Forensic science, the analysis of complex interactive systems, and making inferences from partial data, are all much more interesting than parsing Shakespeare.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/surface-temperature-measurements-advanced.htm <- Climate scientists have put a great deal of effort into answering those questions.





There is remarkably good agreement from several independent sources which includes data analysis performed by people with no professional links (and therefore no way to gain monetarily) to climate science.

Quote
But above all you must insist that it is all their fault, otherwise they will object to paying "green" taxes and having an unreliable electricity supply. Never mind the truth, the careers of many politicians and self-styled "climate scientists" depend on the gullibility of the electorate.

Well that's just simply tin foil hat level conspiracy theory thinking without a shred of actual evidence to back it.
 
The following users thanked this post: ARWIN

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Thanked: 43 times
    • View Profile
Another point to make to the students is, science has only been collecting accurate weather data for about 150 years, give or take. While weather on earth has been a part of earth since it formed billions of years ago. There is a big difference between the data we have from the two time periods, which can create an illusion.

One way to normalize the present and past data, would be to only use the science techniques, used to measure the past, for all present and  future weather data. For example, if you could only use tree rings to talk about weather, you no longer be able to see all the day to day variety reported in the nightly news. If only tree rings were used for the present, it would appear that weather has gotten uniform. Average annual temperate or rainfall, does not tell us much about day to day. If the temperature dropped 10 degree in one hour, you can't see this in the past. It can only be seem by modern tools.

Science does ice core samples to look at the earth's past. This is useful, however, ice core data can only be done where there is ice. One has to approximate weather in warmer climates from this. In the future, we can do ice cores samples in Alaska and then talk about the weather in England.

Maybe as an experiment, if your classroom has windows, have one or two students, each day, monitor the number of birds they see, for a week. After the week is over, present the bird data and tell the class (a white lie) that the consensus of science has shown that there are now more birds near your school than anytime in the past. This is a psychology experiment.

This claim will be hard to refute, since nobody will be able to present any detailed data, before that week. The best anyone will be able to do will require much more work than counting. They may have to interview people and/or look for forensic evident such as old bird nests. This can easily be refuted and called antidotal evidence and not scientific evidence. How can that compared to pictures of live birds on cell phones.

Some of the students will continue to use common sense and critical thinking and might say, this is an illusion because we did not measure the birds before. At that point, make fun of them by calling them deniers. The goal is make everyone is afraid to speak up until  all students see the Emperors new clothes or at least give this lip service.

Part two of the experiment is to see how long it takes for the bird meme to spread through the school and maybe even outside the school, using this core of students as typhoid Mary for the meme.

As a sub experiments, also make ridiculous bird predictions, that won't come true, to see how out of touch the students are willing to become. This is reflected in no change of resolve, even when the predictions fail to appear.
« Last Edit: 25/05/2016 12:28:34 by puppypower »
 
The following users thanked this post: ARWIN

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Quote
How can I strengthen my students' awareness about climate change?

By educating the students about the fundamental differences between water vapor (contrail) and a chemtrail made by exogenous coal fly ash nanoparticles, it should be possible to raise awareness about the consequences of climate hacking.

Also, teachers should demonstrate that climate change is fraudulent by tampering with atmospheric composition on a global scale.
 
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." -George Orwell
« Last Edit: 21/06/2016 11:36:53 by tkadm30 »
 

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Thanked: 43 times
    • View Profile
Teachers should be teaching critical thinking skills and not blind conformity to propaganda. This is why I suggested the bird experiment where you data stack to support a claim. You can show your students how easy it is to create a data illusion and how gullible many students have been made to be due to propaganda thinking. It can also show how the common sense students can be discounted by using the data illusion.

If you look at the leaders who promote manmade global warming, they are not experts. At the same time, climate science does not have its own money, but depends on governments for funding. Science is the worker and not the boss. Politicians, who are laymen, do not surround themselves with those who will disagree or undermine the optics they try to create. They prefer people who are with their program. If you own a tobacco company and hire scientists with good salaries they know who signs their pay check, with promotion and raises based on kissing the hand that signed the check.

Ask yourself how would the changes to culture, proposed to remediate, "climate change", help these leaders, help themselves?  It is a means to an end. Since most of these leaders believe in socialism, world government; bigger government, having an excuse to control energy, means they will have even more power and control over people, including the freer countries. If you control energy you control everyone.

By controlling energy, you can cripple any intellectual and business resistance and set up crony capitalism, where you get a cut. You can also extort and shakedown everyone using a government mandated protection racket scam.  You will be asked to buy protection from the government; goons, by offering tribute.

The carbon credit scam does not reduce the level of carbon, but it will make the leaders rich via a tribute system. Behind the scene the leaders get private fortunes based on crony capitalism and the strong arm of government extortion. The problem is once this scam is instituted it is hard to make to go away even if was subsequently proven to be a scam.

In the state I live, the state government set up a toll ,which was justified as a means to pay for a new road. This seemed reasonable at the time. The toll was supposed to end after the road was paid for. The toll have remained, for decades, even with the road long paid for.  Nobody is made accountable for lying, or for bad judgment, since the new group of scammers will not want such a precedent set. Even if climate change proves to be a scam, once bigger government is implemented, the scammers will continue the shake down since they like to spend other people money and will not give up this sacred cow. There are too many jobs to fail.

Maybe the leaders who want this control, can sign legal documents that makes them responsible for all social losses, which they need to pay back, or mandatory jail, if this is disproven in the future. Nobody will sign such a thing, since they all know this is a scam and power grab.

This is what you should be teaching the students, so they can look at the biggest picture and not the trick. The top dog; money, is not science, since they are beholden on kissing the hand of the layman who has the money. You as a teacher should understand company politics and what happens if you stray from the path set by those who are no even educators, but who control policy.  Teachers are like the scientists who don't make the final decisions, even though you are the experts. Instead you find ways to work within the system that is set up.

When the department of education is abolished, then you will have more flexibility to do the right thing. I can understand the risk involved in telling the truth under the current system of carrot and stick, controlled by laymen.
« Last Edit: 21/06/2016 14:18:56 by puppypower »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8654
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Quote
How can I strengthen my students' awareness about climate change?

By educating the students about the fundamental differences between water vapor (contrail) and a chemtrail made by exogenous coal fly ash nanoparticles, it should be possible to raise awareness about the consequences of climate hacking.

Also, teachers should demonstrate that climate change is fraudulent by tampering with atmospheric composition on a global scale.
 
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

You could teach the students how to distinguish fact from nonsense in a more general sense...

 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
You could teach the students how to distinguish fact from nonsense in a more general sense...

Of course! The plague of disinformation on the net surrounding chemtrails activity is nonsense. Education must ensure that we learn from our mistakes and repel the pseudoscientific voodoo about climate engineering.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums