Politics: April 2008 Archives
A high school student complained about "incorrect" information in his high school textbook. You know, terrible statements that give "the mistaken impression that the scientific evidence of global warming is doubtful and uncertain," like "science doesn't know whether we are experiencing a dangerous level of global warming or how bad the greenhouse effect is."
The problem is that it is a fact that "scientific evidence of global warming is doubtful and uncertain." There's nothing mistaken about that. It is, further, a fact that "science doesn't know whether we are experiencing a dangerous level of global warming or how bad the greenhouse effect is."
An older edition of the textbook added, "if [the greenhouse effect] exists at all," which is incorrect. We know it exists. But we do not know if it has any significant effect on climate.
There are a few thing listed in the book that are incorrect, but the article gives this as the primary example, and it's wrong. Even the IPCC claimed that their evidence is uncertain, and that they do not know whether we have a dangerous level of global warming, or how bad the greenhouse effect is. Them's the facts.
The funniest/saddest part, when the student said, "All the statements for the most part were trying to lead the reader in one direction and not giving a fair account of everything." Except that from his own words it is quite obvious that if the statements were leading the readers in the direction he agreed with -- claiming global warming is fact, for example -- he'd not have had a problem with it.
He added, "I'm not looking to cause a huge controversy, but I want the students to be taught correct information." Agreed. So there should be no problem whatsoever with noting the unquestionable fact that science is uncertain about global warming existing, being dangerous, or being caused by man.
Some of the incorrect examples in the book have to do with religion, for example, the notion that all public prayer in public schools is outlawed. That's a false claim. Unfortunately, what was left out of the book is that doubting the religion of Global Warming in public schools is disallowed. 
Read it and weep. This is the latest proposal headed for ballot initiative in the fall. Who would've thought the Washington Democrats could make Oregon look good in comparison?
AN ACT Relating to abolishing the federal income tax for Washingtonians; adding a new title to the Revised Code of Washington to be codified as Title 666 RCW; creating new sections.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
NEW SECTION. Sec. 101 INTENT. It is the intent of the people in adopting this title to provide the necessary revenues for the support of vital state services on a more stable and equitable basis.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 201 INCOME. All income of residents of the state of Washington, and all income of nonresidents earned in the state of Washington, shall be given to the state of Washington.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 301 CODIFICATION. Sections 101 through 201 of this act constitute a new title in the Revised Code of Washington, to be codified as Title 666 RCW.
--- END ---
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
