Posts
Peter Rivera is not well known to many New Yorkers, despite a decade and a half in the Assembly. He is familiar to the mental health industry because he chairs that committee. In his Bronx district, his major efforts seem to be towards directing "member item" funds into questionable projects.Start the revolution without me.
Mr. Rivera is making a stab at wider recognition with the introduction of a dangerous piece of legislation, one that has grave implications for our schools, our children, and our society.
Mr. Rivera proposes that all students in middle and high school be required to watch the Mr. Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth." In fact, by the end of his press release, he expands the mandate right down to the first grade. It is never too early to proselytize.
"This documentary," Mr. Rivera says, "captures the science along with social issues that undoubtedly have relevance to the lives of all of our young people. It is a must showing to our future generations if only to have them serve as our daily reminders to the adults who govern this planet that we must change or cease to exist."
Mr. Rivera, who up until now never seemed to be particularly interested in the education issues of his community, where test scores rise a lot slower than the temperature of the earth, seems to have found a new cause.
" Al Gore has suggested that every science class in America watch this film," Mr. Rivera says. "My legislation will mandate the showing to all students in grades 1 through 12 because the message of this documentary must be seen by every member of the next generation. They are the ones most likely to listen. The Environmental Revolution we need to confront global warming, if there is one, will come from the youth, as most uprisings do, not from their parents, who are mostly too entrenched in old behavior and lifestyles to be willing to make real change."
source:
An Inconvenient Assemblyman
by Andrew Wolf
New York Sun ($)
Please.
bonus post
fun in Canada
8 comments:
The problem is this is not science. If this were true science then all information would be shown, even that which would contradict man-made global warming.
The great physicist Richard Feynman once gave a commencement speech called "Cargo Cult Science." You can find a copy at http://wwwcdf.pd.infn.it/~loreti/science.html.
Well worth the read!
This quote is from the speech.
"That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying science in school -- we never say explicitly what this is, but just hope that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty -- a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid -- not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked -- to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.
Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. You must do the best you can -- if you know anything at all wrong, or possibly wrong -- to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. There is also a more subtle problem. When you have put a lot of ideas together to make an elaborate theory, you want to make sure, when explaining what it fits, that those things it fits are not just the things that gave you the idea for the theory; but that the finished theory makes something else come out right, in addition.
In summary, the idea is to give all of the information to help others to judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads to judgement in one particular direction or another."
That is how science should work, Gore's film is not science it is propaganda.
It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty -- a kind of leaning over backwards.
That is BEAUTFIFUL.
Thank you so much for posting.
I know this in some "gut" way, but I've never had words to say it.
Thanks Jeff. Dick Feynman and his "Cargo Cult Science" is quite popular here. I remember reading this long ago. Maybe we can find a picture of Al Gore wearing coconut headphones waiting for a Club Med to come in for a landing in Greenland.
My son is getting bits and pieces of "An Inconvenient Truth" and had to write about how GLOBAL WARMING! will affect our community - not the world, but our community. He is in fifth grade. They are going to work on their own version of the Kyoto Protocol and come up with a document to show how the school can become a "Green School".
Global climate simulation models are quite complicated. You have to create a 3-dimensional model of the earth, atmosphere, and oceans. You have to have lots of data. The oceans are especially difficult to model for heat flow. Salinity and density vary and there is turbulance. There are many unknowns. A friend of mine who worked at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute for years just shakes his head. You don't see those scientists pushing to have the film played at schools. It's become quite political.
I'll repeat Jeff's message:
"Gore's film is not science it is propaganda."
By Feynman's definition, the film is anti-science.
Science, when done correctly, is just honest and fair argumentation, and your opponents are all those scientists who have come before you. You need to answer the most compelling forms of your opponents' arguments comprehensively, and part of that is representing those arguments accurately.
The Gore movie fails completely in that basic requirement of science.
My 9th grade son is completing AP Environmental Science this year and has had a difficult time dealing with the assumption running throughout this course that humans are ruining our planet. Yes, they viewed “An Inconvenient Truth”.
The upside for us is that I think my son has had a chance to hone his logical thinking skills, and has learned the lesson that your teacher’s philosophical bent can be influential in the grade you receive. Good lesson for college, I think.
My son attends a science magnet school, so he has watched the film at least once. He has created a lovely poster for Spanish class on what Spain is doing about global warming.
Anyway, propaganda has an important role. Persuasive films, like Gore's, are very important for their political and social effects.
But it is not science and should not be treated as a science lesson for children.
As the end of the year approaches and I see all of the really stupid things my son has sat through this year, An Inconvenient Truth wouldn't make the Top 10.
At least science is discussed. Yes, it lacks balance. It is not honest about where the data is thin.
But it sure beats the trip to the roller coaster park in terms of educational value.
LynnG: "But it sure beats the trip to the roller coaster park in terms of educational value."
At least on the trip to the amusement park the students had fun and no information was actively destroyed. Neither can be said for the Gore screed.
Very good video of Richard Feynman on the nature of science. The last line sums it up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1ZtRN-iGdQ&mode=related&search=
"So we are never right, we can only be sure we are wrong"
Post a Comment