Proposal in Iowa will remove climate change from educational standards.

[lucas80]

Looks like the cancel culture is in full swing. And, of course, when pressed for details on the changes, state officials lied.
https://www.kcrg.com/2025/01/15/iowa-could-remove-mentions-climate-change-education-standards/

 

[stanzithemanzi12]

Good.

 

[Tom Paris]

Let’s just hide science from our kids.

 

[Hawk_82]

Man made climate change is a globalist scare tactic to push a very profitable agenda.

 

[Scruddy]

About time kids learned actual science and not leftist propaganda/nonsense

 

[Hawk_82]

Let’s just hide science from our kids.

Climate changes is about guesses backed by a consensus because they silenced any opposition.

Science does not give you the ability to change the data until it fits the agenda, or to have hundreds of models so that if one of them matches reality then you can claim you are right.

 

[BrianNole777]

Climate changes is about guesses backed by a consensus because they silenced any opposition.

Science does not give you the ability to change the data until it fits the agenda, or to have hundreds of models so that if one of them matches reality then you can claim you are right.

Climate change is completely real:

Evidence - NASA Science

Takeaways The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia. Earth’s climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking...

science.nasa.gov

 

[Colonoscopy]

About time kids learned actual science and not leftist propaganda/nonsense

Lol Retard.

I'm sure you've done exactly zero serious reading on the topic from actual scientists. Actual scientific literature.

Everything passes through the political layer first.

 

[Colonoscopy]

About time kids learned actual science and not leftist propaganda/nonsense

People like you are complete puppets. Completely beholden to stupid tribal political affiliation. You're a monkey. You don't have independent thought.

 

[Hawk_82]

Climate change is completely real:

Evidence - NASA Science

Takeaways The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia. Earth’s climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking...

science.nasa.gov

I stopped reading once they quoted the ipcc in the 2nd paragraph. The ipcc is filled with activists more than it is scientists. Have you read their report? They can only say climate change is likely caused by man because they can't prove it. But they can't even predict all the factors, so it is more of a hypothesis at this point.

 

[Hawk_82]

Lol Retard.

I'm sure you've done exactly zero serious reading on the topic from actual scientists. Actual scientific literature.

Everything passes through the political layer first.

Have you read about it? Can you tell me how much effect water vapor has on the climate? How about clouds? Can you tell me how well the models account for these factors?

 

[BrianNole777]

I stopped reading once they quoted the ipcc in the 2nd paragraph. The ipcc is filled with activists more than it is scientists. Have you read their report? They can only say climate change is likely caused by man because they can't prove it. But they can't even predict all the factors, so it is more of a hypothesis at this point.

Here's another link from Yale...

Climate | Yale and the World

world.yale.edu

 

[Hawk_82]

Here's another link from Yale...

Climate | Yale and the World

world.yale.edu

Yeah, I get it, you can produce a lot of articles that agree with the concensus. The globalists have silenced all those who oppose the man made climate change theory. But that doesn't mean they are right. Like I said before, have you read the ipcc report? They are not as conclusive in the report as the people who quote the report make it seem.

If this was so conclusive, can you tell me what model will be accurate in 30 years?

 

[Colonoscopy]

Have you read about it? Can you tell me how much effect water vapor has on the climate? How about clouds? Can you tell me how well the models account for these factors?

Water vapor is a positive feedback mechanism (and greenhouse gas) that helps to drive climate change. (Rate of evaporation and water vapor both increase as earth warms) It's not primary.

Through extant observations we've found the earth to be warming -- we don't need models for this.

We can use model data to make predictions about how the earth will continue to warm -- and try to model items like the water vapor feedback. Naturally the longer term models are harder to nail down, but we've had plenty of near terms predictions last I read.

 

[Colonoscopy]

Yeah, I get it, you can produce a lot of articles that agree with the concensus. The globalists have silenced all those who oppose the man made climate change theory. But that doesn't mean they are right. Like I said before, have you read the ipcc report? They are not as conclusive in the report as the people who quote the report make it seem.

If this was so conclusive, can you tell me what model will be accurate in 30 years?

Globalists? Oh shut up.

There's a big consensus in the scientific community on this topic. And serious media, government and other institutions naturally are going to default to the experts, the scientific community.

That's your "globalists"

 

[Colonoscopy]

Yeah, I get it, you can produce a lot of articles that agree with the concensus. The globalists have silenced all those who oppose the man made climate change theory. But that doesn't mean they are right. Like I said before, have you read the ipcc report? They are not as conclusive in the report as the people who quote the report make it seem.

If this was so conclusive, can you tell me what model will be accurate in 30 years?

Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right - NASA Science

A new evaluation of global climate models used to project Earth's future global average surface temperature finds that most have been quite accurate.

science.nasa.gov

 

[Hawk_82]

Globalists? Oh shut up.

There's a big consensus in the scientific community on this topic. And serious media, government and other institutions naturally are going to default to the experts, the scientific community.

That's your "globalists"

There are direct links to the globalist agenda in the IPCC report. The only reason there is a concensus is because the globalist have silenced those with opposing views. There are plenty of legit scientists who disagree with the climate change agenda.

Net zero and the sustainable development goals are globalist agenda items and discussed in the ipcc report. your dismissal of the globalist shows you haven't read the report or you don't know about agenda 2030 etc.

Net zero-https://www.weforum.org/stories/2021/11/net-zero-emissions-cop26-climate-change/

Sustainable Development goals https://unosd.un.org/content/sustainable-development-goals-sdgs

 

[Colonoscopy]

There are direct links to the globalist agenda in the IPCC report.

Net zero and the sustainable development goals are globalist agenda items and discussed in the ipcc report. your dismissal of the globalist shows you haven't read the report or you don't know about agenda 2030 etc.

Net zero-https://www.weforum.org/stories/2021/11/net-zero-emissions-cop26-climate-change/

Sustainable Development goals https://unosd.un.org/content/sustainable-development-goals-sdgs

The science stands alone from plans to address climate change.

And if worrying about anthropogenic effects on the climate makes me a globalist, then sign me up.

I think you can debate exactly what might be the best plan to address climate change -- I think it's through tech, largely -- but the focus on the problem itself is completely reasonable.

 

[Colonoscopy]

Have you read about it? Can you tell me how much effect water vapor has on the climate? How about clouds? Can you tell me how well the models account for these factors?

A deeper dive into water vapor

Why do we blame climate change on carbon dioxide, when water vapor is a much more common greenhouse gas?

Extra water vapor we put in the atmosphere doesn’t last long enough to change the long-term temperature of our planet. But water does play a major supporting role in climate change.

climate.mit.edu

 

[Gimmered]

About time kids learned actual science and not leftist propaganda/nonsense

Schools need to be teaching real science and Christianity! Not silly stuff like climate change.

 

[Hawk_82]

Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right - NASA Science

A new evaluation of global climate models used to project Earth's future global average surface temperature finds that most have been quite accurate.

science.nasa.gov

From your link.
"Based on solid physics and the best understanding of the Earth system available, they skillfully reproduce observed data. Nevertheless, they have a wide response to increasing carbon dioxide levels, and many uncertainties remain in the details."

Their models do not control all factors and they don't even agree what will happen with increased co2, but despite not knowing what the response is to higher co2, they are sure co2 is the primary cause. Do you see how this "science" is not very convincing?

 

[Hawk_82]

A deeper dive into water vapor

Why do we blame climate change on carbon dioxide, when water vapor is a much more common greenhouse gas?

Extra water vapor we put in the atmosphere doesn’t last long enough to change the long-term temperature of our planet. But water does play a major supporting role in climate change.

climate.mit.edu

Now try googling how clouds affect the weather/climate. There is a reason that a cloudy day in the summer is cooler than a sunny day.

Now see how well scientists can predict clouds.

 

[Hawk_82]

Here is a link to the IPCC report for those interested.

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_LongerReport.pdf

 

[MitchLL]

Those is the kind of shit that happens when voters give one political Party the super majority.

Some people simply don't understand the ramifications of excessive power.

Republicans = Trash

 

[Hawk_82]

A deeper dive into water vapor

Why do we blame climate change on carbon dioxide, when water vapor is a much more common greenhouse gas?

Extra water vapor we put in the atmosphere doesn’t last long enough to change the long-term temperature of our planet. But water does play a major supporting role in climate change.

climate.mit.edu

This is one of the main reasons many scientists don't believe in man made climate change. There is more water vapor in the atmosphere than co2, Water vapor can have major affects on the temperature/ climate, but since the models can't accurately predict cloud cover, many of them just ignore it in the models.

 

[Colonoscopy]

From your link.
"Based on solid physics and the best understanding of the Earth system available, they skillfully reproduce observed data. Nevertheless, they have a wide response to increasing carbon dioxide levels, and many uncertainties remain in the details."

Their models do not control all factors and they don't even agree what will happen with increased co2, but despite not knowing what the response is to higher co2, they are sure co2 is the primary cause. Do you see how this "science" is not very convincing?

Sigh. Trendline. Look at that. Of course something as complex as the climate can't be modeled with precise resolution. The models had broad agreement where warming was concerned, where effects from increased greenhouse gases like Co2 are concerned.

That means we're really on to something!

Do you know anything about modeling?

Of course they're not going to agree. They're not the same goddamn model, what the actual hell would you expect? A small difference in the logic on model A vs model B means a potentially large difference in predicted outcome for X.

Differences exist because we're not perfectly sure how all relevant interactions in the physical atmosphere work -- so we try different approaches, different algorithms. Over time we monitor how the models do, which are more accurate -- which bits of physics in which models are more accurate -- and adjust. Toss out the bad bits, recombine good bits, spin up new models.

How do you think weather prediction went? We started with nothing and over the last 30 to 40 years have become able to predict large weather events more than a week out; tornado threats over a limited geographical region a couple days out. And we keep getting better.

The evolution of models.

 

[Hawk_82]

Sigh. Trendline. Look at that. Of course something as complex as the climate can't be modeled with precise resolution. The models had broad agreement where warming was concerned, where effects from increased greenhouse gases like Co2 are concerned.

That means we're really on to something!

Do you know anything about modeling?

Of course they're not going to agree. They're not the same goddamn model, what the actual hell would you expect? A small difference in the logic on model A vs model B means a potentially large difference in predicted outcome for X.

Differences exist because we're not perfectly sure how all relevant interactions in the physical atmosphere work -- so we try different approaches, different algorithms. Over time we monitor how the models do, which are more accurate -- which bits of physics in which models are more accurate -- and adjust. Toss out the bad bits, recombine good bits, spin up new models.

How do you think weather prediction went? We started with nothing and over the last 30 to 40 years have become able to predict large weather events more than a week out; tornado threats over a limited geographical region a couple days out. And we keep getting better.

The evolution of models.

Ok, now you are talking science. I agree with science. What is in the IPCC report is not science, it is a theory. But most people believe man made climate change is a proven fact (its not). I don't have a problem with them trying different models, I have a problem with them claiming it is mainly due to co2, then spending trillions of dollars implementing policies to decrease co2 even though they are not sure how co2 affects everything. That is a recipe for disaster.

Many of the models exclude water vapor and clouds all together because they can't predict it well enough. You can't just exclude stuff because you can't figure it out but still claim you know what the climate will be like in 30 years.

Your a smart person, I know you can see how this doesn't make sense.

There are lots of other cycles and factors at play that are much easier to use to predict the general direction.

 

[Sharky1203]

About damn time.

 

[TailgateTom]

More documented indoctrination from the Repubs, I see.

 

[NorthEndzoneCrew]

Eradicating the woke mind virus from our schools one liberal lie at a time! Good job Kim!

Next can be evolution! It’s about time Iowa’s children were taught the real science of how we got here! Not some loony liberal story.

 

[Huey Grey]

Weird how Rs can get on this propaganda asap but still can't do anything about our sky high cancer rates.

 

[SA_Hawk]

Maybe they can teach proper forest and rainfall recapture management instead.

 

[SA_Hawk]

Those is the kind of shit that happens when voters give one political Party the super majority.

Some people simply don't understand the ramifications of excessive power.

Republicans = Trash

Oh we do understand. That’s why the Democrats had to go.

 

[95Hawk]

About damn time.

Regardless of the causes, you don’t believe the climate is changing?

I’m fascinated to hear your educational background and how you’ve come to this conclusion.

 

[NorthEndzoneCrew]

Regardless of the causes, you don’t believe the climate is changing?

I’m fascinated to hear your educational background and how you’ve come to this conclusion.

It’s not rocket science….does it still snow in Iowa? Yep! Does it still got hot in the summer? Yep! Sounds the same to me!

 

[Scruddy]

People like you are complete puppets. Completely beholden to stupid tribal political affiliation. You're a monkey. You don't have independent thought.

So triggered you had to double quote to keep hurling insults. What a loser lol

Regardless of the causes, you don’t believe the climate is changing?

I’m fascinated to hear your educational background and how you’ve come to this conclusion.

The climate is constantly changing and has for 100s of millions of years.

 

[MitchLL]

Oh we do understand. That’s why the Democrats had to go.

We'll see what rural voters in Mississippi North think in 5-10 years when everything revolves around the Des Moines metro.

 

[InsaneHawkJJP]

Regardless of the causes, you don’t believe the climate is changing?

I’m fascinated to hear your educational background and how you’ve come to this conclusion.

Seriously! The climate has changed drastically since I was a child. I don’t remember any winters in the 80’s without snow.

 

[poophawk]

some Alex Jones lovers in here. globalists... lol

 

[Sullivan]

Looks like the cancel culture is in full swing. And, of course, when pressed for details on the changes, state officials lied.
https://www.kcrg.com/2025/01/15/iowa-could-remove-mentions-climate-change-education-standards/

Whatever happened to global warming?