Turn on thread page Beta

Should teachers be allowed to deny Climate Change? watch

    • Study Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    The other day, a (science) teacher of mine said "I don't believe in that greenhouse gas scam". Obviously, people are entitled to their own opinions, but I think this is going way too far. Teachers, especially science teachers, have a responsibility to inform children about critical issues that will affect them (and the society they make) in the future and I personally think it's outrageous that a teacher has said this.

    I'm not saying that teachers shouldn't be allowed to say that there is a debate regarding the degree to which people are responsible, but completely denying the overwhelming scientific consensus is disgusting. The issue is too important for that and a teacher denying climate change gives the denialist movement a credibility it absolutely does not deserve.

    EDIT: I just realised I posted this in the wrong subforum. Sorry!
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    CO2 emissions are sky high.

    CO2 absorbs and re emits IR.

    World is warmed up.

    Weather and climate change.

    No denying it :eek:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    A teacher should have free reign in terms of what he teaches inside his class room. Obviously going over the curriculum is a must but he should be allowed to voice his own opinions on the subject.

    In the same way I'd expect a christian/muslim biology teacher to teach evolution while still being able to voice their skepticism of Darwinism.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No. A teacher should be able to debate possible causes and whatnot, but outright denying a scientific fact shouldn't be allowed. After all, I doubt many people would approve if science teachers started teaching that gravity was a scam.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Red one)
    A teacher should have free reign in terms of what he teaches inside his class room. Obviously going over the curriculum is a must but he should be allowed to voice his own opinions on the subject.

    In the same way I'd expect a christian/muslim biology teacher to teach evolution while still being able to voice their skepticism of Darwinism.
    In regards to the mention of religion, Religious Studies teachers are not supposed to let students know what their personal beliefs are - regardless of how effective they are at teaching the curriculum.
    • Study Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Red one)
    A teacher should have free reign in terms of what he teaches inside his class room. Obviously going over the curriculum is a must but he should be allowed to voice his own opinions on the subject.

    In the same way I'd expect a christian/muslim biology teacher to teach evolution while still being able to voice their skepticism of Darwinism.
    You're ignoring the consequences of such an action. Climate change is an extremely dangerous process that is going to cause a massive amount of damage to society in the future if people deny its existence and our fault. There is a huge difference between voicing your opinion on something which has very few real-life implications - such as the validity of evolution as a scientific theory - and something that is directly going to have a devastating impact on the whole of humanity as well as the rest of the biosphere.

    The purpose of a teacher - especially a science teacher - is to teach the truth. If a science teacher teaches an idea which is shunned by virtually the entire scientific community, an idea that has been completely invalidated for a decade now, that is nothing but completely irresponsible and reckless.

    (Original post by L'Evil Fish)
    CO2 emissions are sky high.

    CO2 absorbs and re emits IR.

    World is warmed up.

    Weather and climate change.

    No denying it :eek:
    You'd think, wouldn't you -_-
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Teachers should teach what is on the syllabus for the subject, as it's there job. As far as I'm aware, science teaches the effects of greenhouse gases, so saying it's false is wrong as a teacher in my opinion, as it can cause conflicting thoughts for the students.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    The other day, a (science) teacher of mine said "I don't believe in that greenhouse gas scam". Obviously, people are entitled to their own opinions, but I think this is going way too far. Teachers, especially science teachers, have a responsibility to inform children about critical issues that will affect them (and the society they make) in the future and I personally think it's outrageous that a teacher has said this.

    I'm not saying that teachers shouldn't be allowed to say that there is a debate regarding the degree to which people are responsible, but completely denying the overwhelming scientific consensus is disgusting. The issue is too important for that and a teacher denying climate change gives the denialist movement a credibility it absolutely does not deserve.

    EDIT: I just realised I posted this in the wrong subforum. Sorry!
    (Original post by Red one)
    A teacher should have free reign in terms of what he teaches inside his class room. Obviously going over the curriculum is a must but he should be allowed to voice his own opinions on the subject.

    In the same way I'd expect a christian/muslim biology teacher to teach evolution while still being able to voice their skepticism of Darwinism.
    Their personal beliefs shouldn't be voiced if they contradict the curriculum they're required to teach.
    • Study Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Stanno)
    Their personal beliefs shouldn't be voiced if they contradict the curriculum they're required to teach.
    Does it though? The curriculum specifically says that there is debate regarding how responsible we are for Climate Change, and he is very clearly on an extreme end of that debate. By saying he thinks it's a scam, is he directly contradicting the curriculum?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Teachers should be allowed to deny climate change until the cows come home outside of the classroom, but in the classroom teachers should in no way be allowed to teach nonsense.

    (Original post by Red one)
    A teacher should have free reign in terms of what he teaches inside his class room. Obviously going over the curriculum is a must but he should be allowed to voice his own opinions on the subject.

    In the same way I'd expect a christian/muslim biology teacher to teach evolution while still being able to voice their skepticism of Darwinism.
    Teachers should be in no way allowed to spread misinformation and propaganda. Science teachers teach science, so they teach evolution.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Climate Change should definitely be taught from the perspective that there is a huge amount of evidence for it, however some media sources/politicians are still sceptical. Teachers can then explain why what these politicians and newspapers are saying are exaggerations or just wrong.

    Otherwise we'd end up like the conservative American states, where teachers can teach creationism and deny climate change.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    Does it though? The curriculum specifically says that there is debate regarding how responsible we are for Climate Change, and he is very clearly on an extreme end of that debate. By saying he thinks it's a scam, is he directly contradicting the curriculum?
    There is ongoing public debate, there isn't scientific debate, that's been done and had many, many years ago.

    "A meta study of academic papers concerning global warming, published between 1991 and 2011 and accessible from Web of Knowledge, found that among those whose abstracts expressed a position on the cause of global warming, 97.2% supported the consensus view that it is man made."

    "In an October 2011 paper published in the International Journal of Public Opinion Research, researchers from George Mason University analyzed the results of a survey of 489 American scientists working in academia, government, and industry. Of those surveyed, 97% agreed that that global temperatures have risen over the past century and 84% agreed that "human-induced greenhouse warming" is now occurring, only 5% disagreeing that human activity is a significant cause of global warming." - and that's in the US, where there's probably more climate change deniers in science than in other countries.

    "In the scientific literature, there is a strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases. No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view."

    So either the curriculum is wrong (which I doubt) or he misrepresented what the curriculum actually says (there being a public debate and not a scientific one).
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Red one)
    A teacher should have free reign in terms of what he teaches inside his class room. Obviously going over the curriculum is a must but he should be allowed to voice his own opinions on the subject.

    In the same way I'd expect a christian/muslim biology teacher to teach evolution while still being able to voice their skepticism of Darwinism.
    There scepticism is based on a personal belief that others in the class may not share. It certainly isn't a view shared by science.

    If I believed that the earth is flat (there is actually a flat earth society btw), should I be allowed to teach this to children?

    Speaking as a student, I don't want to listen to a teacher's crazy personal scepticism based on a belief that has no supporting evidence.
    • Study Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Stanno)
    There is ongoing public debate, there isn't scientific debate, that's been done and had many, many years ago.

    "A meta study of academic papers concerning global warming, published between 1991 and 2011 and accessible from Web of Knowledge, found that among those whose abstracts expressed a position on the cause of global warming, 97.2% supported the consensus view that it is man made."

    "In an October 2011 paper published in the International Journal of Public Opinion Research, researchers from George Mason University analyzed the results of a survey of 489 American scientists working in academia, government, and industry. Of those surveyed, 97% agreed that that global temperatures have risen over the past century and 84% agreed that "human-induced greenhouse warming" is now occurring, only 5% disagreeing that human activity is a significant cause of global warming." - and that's in the US, where there's probably more climate change deniers in science than in other countries.

    "In the scientific literature, there is a strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases. No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view."

    So either the curriculum is wrong (which I doubt) or he misrepresented what the curriculum actually says (there being a public debate and not a scientific one).
    You don't need to tell me about the scientific consensus, I am completely aware. I still don't see how he's contradicting the curriculum. He's not saying that there isn't a debate, he's saying that climate change is a scam, which is his view. Completely irresponsible and not representative of the scientific community, I agree, but he's still not contradicting the textbook.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    You don't need to tell me about the scientific consensus, I am completely aware. I still don't see how he's contradicting the curriculum. He's not saying that there isn't a debate, he's saying that climate change is a scam, which is his view. Completely irresponsible and not representative of the scientific community, I agree, but he's still not contradicting the textbook.
    Well, I'm assuming that the curriculum states that humans are responsible (at least to a substantial degree) for global warming? :confused:

    EDIT: Done some quick research, would seem that the current/previous curriculum only mentions humans being able to effect the environment, but doesn't specifically mention global warming or the like. The new curriculum does however. [https://www.gov.uk/government/news/c...nal-curriculum]
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    The other day, a (science) teacher of mine said "I don't believe in that greenhouse gas scam". Obviously, people are entitled to their own opinions, but I think this is going way too far. Teachers, especially science teachers, have a responsibility to inform children about critical issues that will affect them (and the society they make) in the future and I personally think it's outrageous that a teacher has said this.

    I'm not saying that teachers shouldn't be allowed to say that there is a debate regarding the degree to which people are responsible, but completely denying the overwhelming scientific consensus is disgusting. The issue is too important for that and a teacher denying climate change gives the denialist movement a credibility it absolutely does not deserve.

    EDIT: I just realised I posted this in the wrong subforum. Sorry!
    Technically, in a scientific sense, global warming hasn't been proved enough to be considered concrete (I think it's about 3 sigma and needs to be five). So the teacher can by all accounts voice other opinions as well. However, denying the greenhouse effect is completely unscientific and is a step out of line by your teacher. Did they go on to explain their reasoning?
    • Study Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Stanno)
    Well, I'm assuming that the curriculum states that humans are responsible (at least to a substantial degree) for global warming? :confused:
    From what I remember, it said something along the lines of "Most scientists agree that humans are responsible to a degree for global warming". It definitely doesn't say that we are responsible for global warming because the fact of the matter is that it's not been proven. We know to a very high degree of certainty that we are responsible, but it's not been proven yet.

    (Original post by tory88)
    Technically, in a scientific sense, global warming hasn't been proved enough to be considered concrete (I think it's about 3 sigma and needs to be five). So the teacher can by all accounts voice other opinions as well. However, denying the greenhouse effect is completely unscientific and is a step out of line by your teacher. Did they go on to explain their reasoning?
    Firstly, I know that it hasn't been proven yet (which I actually just wrote before I saw your reply!) but my point is that as an individual with the responsibility to educate young people, it is irresponsible for a teacher to deny climate change when it almost certainly is our fault.

    And actually, you raise a good point. When this teacher actually taught me (a few years ago), I very specifically remember what he said. He told the class "Our dependence on fossil fuels results in lots of CO2 being given out which apparently causes global warming, if you believe that kind of rubbish". When I actually spoke to his a couple of days ago, he specifically said that the "Greenhouse effect is a scam", which very obviously is factually incorrect.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Whether there is or isn't man-made global warming is a secondary issue. The primary issue is that the scientific consensus is extremely discredited and climate science is at very best questionable. You cannot make claims on the veracity of an issue when that issue is enforced (as is often the case on this forum) in a North Korean manner.

    I am willing to believe in a creditable and reliable case either way. What I will not believe in is a pack of lies delivered in the manner of organised fraudsters and charlatans.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    From what I remember, it said something along the lines of "Most scientists agree that humans are responsible to a degree for global warming". It definitely doesn't say that we are responsible for global warming because the fact of the matter is that it's not been proven. We know to a very high degree of certainty that we are responsible, but it's not been proven yet.
    Just edited my previous post, sorry.

    That aside, I'm pretty sure high degrees of certainty are 'proof' in science, it's just a question of how high that certainty is required to be before something is considered 'proven'.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    As long as it is criticized using science then it is fine.
 
 
 

2,727

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.