Proposal in Iowa will remove climate change from educational standards.

[Hawkstate1]

Even if climate change is true, and the climate alarmists are right. Who gives a f**k. I have been hearing about this crap for the majority of my life; too hot too cold.....oh the hurricanes are going to increase in number and severity; all BS. The Green agenda is being driven by money, and all of the rubes on the left are buying it. Buy an electric car, save the planet, even though the amount of pollution caused by lithium mining in China far exceeds that from burning fossil fuels, same with wind turbines. But those pushing the agenda don't own oil land, no they own green companies, and pay billions to any pseudo science institution to churn out propaganda that reinforces their agenda. And then government agencies like NASA staff their agency with political appointees that reflect the green religion. Rinse, repeat sell it to the rubes. Way to go Governor and legislature, commonsense, truth and science will win yet.

Why would anyone believe the government and pseudo scientists after the shit they pulled during COVID?

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

Even if climate change is true, and the climate alarmists are right. Who gives a f**k. I have been hearing about this crap for the majority of my life; too hot too cold.....oh the hurricanes are going to increase in number and severity; all BS. The Green agenda is being driven by money, and all of the rubes on the left are buying it. Buy an electric car, save the planet, even though the amount of pollution caused by lithium mining in China far exceeds that from burning fossil fuels, same with wind turbines. But those pushing the agenda don't own oil land, no they own green companies, and pay billions to any pseudo science institution to churn out propaganda that reinforces their agenda. And then government agencies like NASA staff their agency with political appointees that reflect the green religion. Rinse, repeat sell it to the rubes. Way to go Governor and legislature, commonsense, truth and science will win yet.

Why would anyone believe the government and pseudo scientists after the shit they pulled during COVID?

You're the latest recipient of the Giddy Redneck Award

 

[Hawkstate1]

You're the latest recipient of the Giddy Redneck Award

Good one, you should probably work for the government, disagree, call them a name.

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

Good one, you should probably work for the government, disagree, call them a name.

Thanks!

 

[joelbc1]

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

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

Temperatures have been “officially” recorded for almost 170 years in Iowa. Using “average temperature” as the guide, the past 10 years have been the warmest 10 years during this (170 year) time period. Is this just a coincidence or is it a concern?

 

[Gimmered]

Even if climate change is true, and the climate alarmists are right. Who gives a f**k. I have been hearing about this crap for the majority of my life; too hot too cold.....oh the hurricanes are going to increase in number and severity; all BS. The Green agenda is being driven by money, and all of the rubes on the left are buying it. Buy an electric car, save the planet, even though the amount of pollution caused by lithium mining in China far exceeds that from burning fossil fuels, same with wind turbines. But those pushing the agenda don't own oil land, no they own green companies, and pay billions to any pseudo science institution to churn out propaganda that reinforces their agenda. And then government agencies like NASA staff their agency with political appointees that reflect the green religion. Rinse, repeat sell it to the rubes. Way to go Governor and legislature, commonsense, truth and science will win yet.

Why would anyone believe the government and pseudo scientists after the shit they pulled during COVID?

Everyone wanting insurance should give a ****.

 

[Ree4]

My belief in Christianity is completely based in faith, just like your belief in climate change.

Let me guess, you don't believe in teaching evolution either? This seems reminiscent of the Scopes trial - idiots denied science 100 years ago too.

The Scopes trial, formally The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes, and commonly referred to as the Scopes Monkey Trial, was an American legal case from July 10 to July 21, 1925, in which a high school teacher, John T. Scopes, was accused of violating Tennessee's Butler Act, which had made it illegal for teachers to teach human evolution in any state-funded school.

Scopes trial - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[bunsen82]

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?

https://www.weather.gov/media/slc/ClimateBook/Annual%20Average%20Temperature%20By%20Year.pdf

Prior to 2010, there had been 0 average temps in the US above 56 degrees. Since 2010 we have had 6. Since 2010, there has been only 2 years where the average temp was below 55 degrees. We are average over 3 degrees higher temps than what they saw a century ago.

 

[Hawk_82]

https://www.weather.gov/media/slc/ClimateBook/Annual%20Average%20Temperature%20By%20Year.pdf

Prior to 2010, there had been 0 average temps in the US above 56 degrees. Since 2010 we have had 6. Since 2010, there has been only 2 years where the average temp was below 55 degrees. We are average over 3 degrees higher temps than what they saw a century ago.

During that same time the average co2 level went from 390 to 420. Histoy proves that an increase of 30 ppm co2 does not cause this increase in temp.

Having said that, we have gone from manually checking a mercury thermometer 50 years ago to now having electronic thermometers or using satellite data and then using a computer program to adjust data how they see fit.

The data we are working with is not exactly reliable down to the tenth. Historically data was rounded up or down by a degree and if the time of day the temp was checked varied, the temp could easily be off by a few degrees.

The reality is that crop yields are better than ever and climate change has not changed most people's life at all.

 

[Menace Sockeyes]

Good.

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

About damn time.

They are removing climate change, not science.

If schools teach climate change, they need to do it in a class that teaches other religions equally. Roman Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism other Christian denominations as well as climate change.

 

[abby97]

At least get this right. Nobody doubts climate change. The contention is over causes. (and the best evidence points towards the effects 8 billion people are having on earth right now)

When I reference climate change, I'm referring to the present nomenclature of that term. Meaning the political scam the left has been pushing for years claiming breathing, heating your home, driving cars, cooking food, etc. is killing the planet. Sorry, I and most rationale people don't believe that anymore. That grift was developed purely as a political tool to control the masses. Actual climate change, the phenomenon the planet has experienced since it's creation and continues to experience, is a completely different topic. You would do well by acknowleding the difference between the two.

 

[Hawk_82]

GLOBALISTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm curious if you consider George Soros, Bill Gates, and the World Economic Forum members globalists?

 

[Colonoscopy]

When I reference climate change, I'm referring to the present nomenclature of that term. Meaning the political scam the left has been pushing for years claiming breathing, heating your home, driving cars, cooking food, etc. is killing the planet. Sorry, I and most rationale people don't believe that anymore. That grift was developed purely as a political tool to control the masses. Actual climate change, the phenomenon the planet has experienced since it's creation and continues to experience, is a completely different topic. You would do well by acknowleding the difference between the two.

I think the left has had stupid rhetoric surrounding global warming in areas. (particularly in sensationalized media)

But where I strongly disagree with you is that it was done for the purposes of controlling the masses. That's absolute quackery. The American left, for a while now, has had environmentalists tugging on its strings. Add to the that the fact that the earth is warming, that the consequences of such became well known, and that people could be driving it all, and you had the emergence of a powerful political topic.

It wasn't a plot to control people.

 

[Hawk_82]

I think the left has had stupid rhetoric surrounding global warming in areas. (particularly in sensationalized media)

But where I strongly disagree with you is that it was done for the purposes of controlling the masses. That's absolute quackery. The American left, for a while now, has had environmentalists tugging on its strings. Add to the that the fact that the earth is warming, that the consequences of such became well known, and that people could be driving it all, and you had the emergence of a powerful political topic.

It wasn't a plot to control people.

If you don't read a lot of United Nations or WEF documents, I can understand your perspective.
Klause Schwab is/was the head of the WEF, he also has a book called the great reset where he says never let a crisis go to waste. There is also discussion about how you can manufacture a crisis to get the masses to fund and support your agenda.

There are a lot of people who dismiss the idea of the globalists, but they are real. In fact, Biden just gave Soros the presidential medal of freedom, so it's pretty clear biden and dems place value on soros and his actions. Many of the white house policies were developed and even written by members of the wef.

The Obama and white house implemented the policies that were created by the wef such as agenda 2030, climate change agenda, immigration agenda, race issues, gender, C40 cities, etc.

We could argue whether the motive of the globalists are malicious or good, but many deny the globalists play a role in our government. This is purely naive and shows the person is only going off what the msm tells them.

 

[IIowaFarmBoy]

Temperatures have been “officially” recorded for almost 170 years in Iowa. Using “average temperature” as the guide, the past 10 years have been the warmest 10 years during this (170 year) time period. Is this just a coincidence or is it a concern?

Anyone involved in agriculture in this state knows the climate has changed.

 

[joelbc1]

Anyone involved in agriculture in this state knows the climate has changed.

Perhaps…. But they won’t admit it to anyone.

 

[IIowaFarmBoy]

Perhaps…. But they won’t admit it to anyone.

Who is they? I certainly see it and I've managed a billion dollars worth of farm assets.

 

[joelbc1]

Who is they? I certainly see it and I've managed a billion dollars worth of farm assets.

You can’t find but a handful in Iowa will admit to what is referred to as climate change. The numbers there but most folks blow the numbers off as an anomaly. Temps are more extreme, storms are more severe and precipitation is extreme (wet abd dry)… and this is true all across the nation…but yet this is all part of some conspiracy…Americans are a bizarre lot easily influenced and devoid of critical thinking skills. Geljsvekjs, Iowas finances want to know why tgeeecaee a re as if high cancer u budgets… abd baby think that nitrates in the water is no big deal. Including the current governor.

 

[Hawk_82]

Anyone involved in agriculture in this state knows the climate has changed.

What are you seeing in agriculture that tells you the climate has changed?

Do you attribute the change to man or to normal weather patterns?

The climate may be changing, but I don't believe it is primarily from man. I am not convinced that the adjustments that have been made to the temp records reflect the true temps either.

 

[Sharky1203]

You can’t find but a handful in Iowa will admit to what is referred to as climate change. The numbers there but most folks blow the numbers off as an anomaly. Temps are more extreme, storms are more severe and precipitation is extreme (wet abd dry)… and this is true all across the nation…but yet this is all part of some conspiracy…Americans are a bizarre lot easily influenced and devoid of critical thinking skills. Geljsvekjs, Iowas finances want to know why tgeeecaee a re as if high cancer u budgets… abd baby think that nitrates in the water is no big deal. Including the current governor.

I wonder if they said those same things in the 1930"s?

 

[joelbc1]

What are you seeing in agriculture that tells you the climate has changed?

Do you attribute the change to man or to normal weather patterns?

The climate may be changing, but I don't believe it is primarily from man. I am not convinced that the adjustments that have been made to the temp records reflect the true temps either.

Well “if” the climate is changing, we (man) should never take steps to mitigate the change unless we know for sure we (man) are causing the changes! I’m sure man hasn’t complicated life on Earth with his lifestyle and waste over the years.

 

[joelbc1]

I wonder if they said those same things in the 1930"s?

Science figured it out pretty quickly, Sharky. Improved farming practices and a more robust economy corrected the problems . Again, the weather extremes experienced in the 30’s were petty compared to what we have seen on earth tge past decades. Also, the problems suffered in the 30’s were more local compared to the world-wide observations of today.

 

[IIowaFarmBoy]

What are you seeing in agriculture that tells you the climate has changed?

Do you attribute the change to man or to normal weather patterns?

The climate may be changing, but I don't believe it is primarily from man. I am not convinced that the adjustments that have been made to the temp records reflect the true temps either.

I have no idea, but I would guess in part it is man made.

I see stronger events but less events. Longer season corn varieties from 109 from the 90s to 115 today and they are drying down. Dust storms like crazy, but a lot of that is from high speed tillage. We are seeing crop damage from floods, but not so much as saturated soils like in the past.

Getting crops in the past ten years has been challenging. We can do field tile installations into January which was unheard of before.

More micro droughts that cause damage.

 

[IIowaFarmBoy]

Well “if” the climate is changing, we (man) should never take steps to mitigate the change unless we know for sure we (man) are causing the changes! I’m sure man hasn’t complicated life on Earth with his lifestyle and waste over the years.

We make changes first. We unleashed GMO with no real data as an example. But you can say the same thing about VAX/COVID which you will argue about.

 

[Sharky1203]

Science figured it out pretty quickly, Sharky. Improved farming practices and a more robust economy corrected the problems . Again, the weather extremes experienced in the 30’s were petty compared to what we have seen on earth tge past decades. Also, the problems suffered in the 30’s were more local compared to the world-wide observations of today.

Okay, whatever. It sucks that throughout time there are periods of time when conditions were just as bad or worse that what we've seen in the past 50 years. Kinda kills most arguments about climate.

 

[Hawk_82]

I have no idea, but I would guess in part it is man made.

I see stronger events but less events. Longer season corn varieties from 109 from the 90s to 115 today and they are drying down. Dust storms like crazy, but a lot of that is from high speed tillage. We are seeing crop damage from floods, but not so much as saturated soils like in the past.

Getting crops in the past ten years has been challenging. We can do field tile installations into January which was unheard of before.

More micro droughts that cause damage.

I agree with a lot of this. Man made climate change due to rising co2 is different than what you mentioned imo.

Most of what you mentioned may be due to man made changes though. We tile fields to get the water out of the fields as quick as possible, but this leads to dryer ground and dust storms.

Tiling gets the water away from the fiels and into large streams or rivers so the water doesn't have a chance to soak deep into the ground.

We have made levees around our rivers which decrease large floods, but when the levees are breached the damage is severe.

We have filled up most of the wetlands so we are effectively decreasing the moisture level in the soil and air.

There is a lot of research out there about these issues, but they rarely ever get talked about by msm.

I believe corn and bean yields have increased over the last 20 years. i could be wrong on this though.

 

[joelbc1]

Okay, whatever. It sucks that throughout time there are periods of time when conditions were just as bad or worse that what we've seen in the past 50 years. Kinda kills most arguments about climate.

Periods of time…but we are on quite a roll right now.
The past decade has given us drought, wildfires, increased severe storms ( hurricanes, tornadoes and snow) record breaking heat temperature averages.. abs this is not just phenomena related to the US but worldwide…something is going on out there Sharky that deserves some attention.

 

[Sharky1203]

Periods of time…but we are on quite a roll right now.
The past decade has given us drought, wildfires, increased severe storms ( hurricanes, tornadoes and snow) record breaking heat temperature averages.. abs this is not just phenomena related to the US but worldwide…something is going on out there Sharky that deserves some attention.

Not happening. It's always been doing that stuff. People are just more hyper focused on it now because huge amounts of money are being funnelled to it. People used to just deal with it and move on. Now people want there to be something wrong so more money can be thrown at it. Do I believe that we should be aware of pollution and keeping the world clean, but not to the levels that climate change cultists do. If we stop giving money to the BS, you'd see all this propaganda go away.

 

[RicoSuave102954]

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/

Good no use scaring people with complete mumbo jumbo.

 

[IIowaFarmBoy]

I agree with a lot of this. Man made climate change due to rising co2 is different than what you mentioned imo.

Most of what you mentioned may be due to man made changes though. We tile fields to get the water out of the fields as quick as possible, but this leads to dryer ground and dust storms.

Tiling gets the water away from the fiels and into large streams or rivers so the water doesn't have a chance to soak deep into the ground.

We have made levees around our rivers which decrease large floods, but when the levees are breached the damage is severe.

We have filled up most of the wetlands so we are effectively decreasing the moisture level in the soil and air.

There is a lot of research out there about these issues, but they rarely ever get talked about by msm.

I believe corn and bean yields have increased over the last 20 years. i could be wrong on this though.

Yes yields increased a lot. One of my class B farms with a really good farmer hit 300 bu on corn this year across a field.

In part you are right about tile. Done right it takes away the over saturation and leaves what is usable which is a more effective way of using nutrients. The problem is that inlets and standpipes have not filter for keeping N and P from moving into the rivers/streams. It is a huge problem and universities have cut real research and are dependent on the companies for money, so there you go.

A bigger issue on Iowa flooding is how bad farmers are about tillage on erodible ground which allows the sediments to fill rivers. Also taking out natural flow and straightening waterways increases the velocity of water which piles up in floods like the U Iowa baseball field.

I used to be very conservative, but I am getting tired of recreational farmer tillage and the environmental impact for all of us.

If I hear another farmer (we had 8 killed in an interstate pileup) blame God for dust storms...I'll lose my mind. Sometime this spring I plan an article addressing this.

I'm also surprised we don't tax the heck out of recreational huge trucks.

 

[Hawk_82]

Well “if” the climate is changing, we (man) should never take steps to mitigate the change unless we know for sure we (man) are causing the changes! I’m sure man hasn’t complicated life on Earth with his lifestyle and waste over the years.

I am open to changes to mitigate this stuff. I support cleaner burning cars so we pollute less. I want a clean environment too. But let the changes happen naturally rather than the government trying to force these fixes on us that probably wont even fix anything and may make things worse.

The California wildfires are an example of how you can make things worse when you do the wrong thing. They chose not to do forest management so they could "save" some animals and keep the environment "natural". Democrats tend to live in an ideological world instead of reality.

 

[IIowaFarmBoy]

I am open to changes to mitigate this stuff. I support cleaner burning cars so we pollute less. I want a clean environment too. But let the changes happen naturally rather than the government trying to force these fixes on us that probably wont even fix anything and may make things worse.

The California wildfires are an example of how you can make things worse when you do the wrong thing. They chose not to do forest management so they could "save" some animals and keep the environment "natural". Democrats tend to live in an ideological world instead of reality.

It is not human nature to change that way. Selfishness is the core of capitalism ideologically.

What is happening in LA is extreme which happens on both sides.

What happened in LA is

 

[hawkedoff]

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.

I have this rock I can sell you that keeps Tigers away....


Weather isn't climate remember? At least that is the argument when the weather doesn't follow the narrative of the climate models.

Climate science is only science at this point because it is in the title. Otherwise it is simply a religion or a grift. Religion to science disciples as if science is dogma that isn't at its core meant to be challenged. Or drifters that know the game and want to make a buck or obtain power.

 

[youflog1hawk]

I'm curious if you consider George Soros, Bill Gates, and the World Economic Forum members globalists?

Sure as s?!t are. Where John Kerry can’t get enough of. You’ll own nothing and love it!

 

[mthawkeyes]

I am open to changes to mitigate this stuff. I support cleaner burning cars so we pollute less. I want a clean environment too. But let the changes happen naturally rather than the government trying to force these fixes on us that probably wont even fix anything and may make things worse.

The California wildfires are an example of how you can make things worse when you do the wrong thing. They chose not to do forest management so they could "save" some animals and keep the environment "natural". Democrats tend to live in an ideological world instead of reality.

This argument is so tiresome. The fossil fuel industry is fat with government subsidies and externalized costs. But renewables should have stand on their own two feet to "let things happen naturally". Adam Smith understood very well how externalized costs pervert markets, but the modern iteration of conservatism seems blissfully unaware. Just as the oil companies themselves were doing research in the 70s and 80s that made them very aware that increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere would alter climate significantly. But then in the 90s, in order to protect their profits, they made the business decision to obfuscate and delay and bought our politicians. These facts are very well documented. Their propaganda has been so effective that now we have people regurgitating the claim that the opposite is true, that somehow there are huge profits to be made by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the benevolent fossil fuel industry just wants to be left alone so that they can continue their service to humanity.

 

[joelbc1]

This argument is so tiresome. The fossil fuel industry is fat with government subsidies and externalized costs. But renewables should have stand on their own two feet to "let things happen naturally". Adam Smith understood very well how externalized costs pervert markets, but the modern iteration of conservatism seems blissfully unaware. Just as the oil companies themselves were doing research in the 70s and 80s that made them very aware that increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere would alter climate significantly. But then in the 90s, in order to protect their profits, they made the business decision to obfuscate and delay and bought our politicians. These facts are very well documented. Their propaganda has been so effective that now we have people regurgitating the claim that the opposite is true, that somehow there are huge profits to be made by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the benevolent fossil fuel industry just wants to be left alone so that they can continue their service to humanity.

Bingo!
The fossil fuel business has had more than enough help over tge years from government programs and tax breaks. What’s fair for the goose should be fair for the gander. Alternative fuels deserve tge same benefits as fossil fuels, I would think.

 

[Hawki97]

If only climate change would come and melt these Ioway GOP snowflakes. Bunch of bitches.

 

[Hawk_82]

This argument is so tiresome. The fossil fuel industry is fat with government subsidies and externalized costs. But renewables should have stand on their own two feet to "let things happen naturally". Adam Smith understood very well how externalized costs pervert markets, but the modern iteration of conservatism seems blissfully unaware. Just as the oil companies themselves were doing research in the 70s and 80s that made them very aware that increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere would alter climate significantly. But then in the 90s, in order to protect their profits, they made the business decision to obfuscate and delay and bought our politicians. These facts are very well documented. Their propaganda has been so effective that now we have people regurgitating the claim that the opposite is true, that somehow there are huge profits to be made by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the benevolent fossil fuel industry just wants to be left alone so that they can continue their service to humanity.

I dont understand your claim, you say big oil was corrupt, so now you approve of the climate change crowd being corrupt too? Have we not learned anything?

I think wind and solar are crap sources of energy on the large scale. I don't see any benefit in subsidizing them. They are intermittent energy sources that are not even very effective.

I am open to a real discussion on subsidies as well. But I don't think this is the future and is actually a big waste of time, resources and money. No group is above being questioned, including big oil and so called green energy.

 

[Hawk_82]

Bingo!
The fossil fuel business has had more than enough help over tge years from government programs and tax breaks. What’s fair for the goose should be fair for the gander. Alternative fuels deserve tge same benefits as fossil fuels, I would think.

This is such backward thinking. It's like you want to screw Americans with more bad policy because big oil lied and was corrupt back in the day.

Will it make things even once you finally figure out how much the green agenda is lying to you?

I would rather we learn from our mistakes with big oil instead of repeating the same mistakes.

 

[Hammerhead02]

This is such backward thinking. It's like you want to screw Americans with more bad policy because big oil lied and was corrupt back in the day.

Will it make things even once you finally figure out how much the green agenda is lying to you?

I would rather we learn from our mistakes with big oil instead of repeating the same mistakes.

How is green energy lying? I am curious. MidAmerican doesn't seem to mind it.