Latest posts by Nancy Thorner (see all)
- Nuclear Radiation Hysteria Based on Flawed Science - July 17, 2019
- Higher Education in Critical Need of Reform, Author Says - July 5, 2019
- A Case for Patriotism on Eve of Independence Day - July 4, 2019
What is happening in a 4th grade class at Cherokee Elementary School in Lake Forest School District 67 in far northern Illinois is not unlike what is happening in classrooms around this state and nation. Students at Cherokee Elementary School have been learning about renewable sources of energy. In the process they are being encourage to become young political activists through interaction with their Lake Forest City government and their local Democrat state representative, Scott Drury of the 58th State House district.
The article heretofore referenced, “Cherokee students, state experts talk renewable energy,” was written by Steve Sadin of the Pioneer Press, a Chicago Tribune Publication, where it appeared in print on Thursday, April 9, 2015.
Children are extremely gullible. They will accept whatever their teachers convey to them. Consider the polar bear ruse. Most likely these 4th graders fell prey to the polar bear ruse in an earlier grade when global warming was first introduced. Images of periled polar bears (bears can swim!) sinking into arctic seas because of melting polar ice caps have become an iconic symbol of the devastating consequences of so-called global warming. However, a new government investigation into the supposed science surrounding this now-infamous urban legend has revealed that it was likely nothing more than a pseudoscientific hoax propagated by faulty math and perfunctory observations.
What if the Obama administration and politicians in Washington D.C., as well as those in our state capitol, are using fear of global warming to justify higher taxes, new regulations, and huge subsidies to insiders and major donors to their political campaigns. It is estimated that on the whole global warming legislation would result in raising energy costs for a typical family by $3,900 every year and increase the risk of dangerous power outages. Even the Obama administration admits how reductions in energy use caused by its policies would have no effect on the global climate. Why, because any reduction in carbon dioxide emission by the U.S. would be more than offset by increases in emissions from China, India, and other countries.
Do parents know what their children are being taught in their classrooms? The Common Core Science curriculum teaches that global warming is manmade and that the science behind global warming is settled. The “Essential Principles of Climate Science”, composed of seven guidelines, has as its guiding principle that humans can take actions to reduce climate change and its impacts. As to Common Core standards, a framework is set forth for K-12 Science Education which includes suggested guidelines for what children should know by the end of 5th, 8th and 12 grades. For example, by the end of 8th grade students are expected to accept that human activities, such as the release of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels, are major factors in the current rise in Earth’s mean surface temperature as reflected in global warming.
When 4th graders at the Cherokee Elementary School, through research, settled on wind and solar power as the best power methods for the City of Lake Forest, having rejected hydroelectric power, were they ever encouraged to research the drawbacks inherent in wind and solar power before they went vocal with their conclusions? Not likely, as the purpose of their research was to ascertain that renewable energy sources are good for the environment, while fossil fuels are bad and cause global warming.
Instead, the 4th graders accepted hook, line and sinker that fossil fuels cause global warming, which was then reinforced by a visit from their Illinois state representative Steve Drury and others classroom guests, with agendas that advance global warming alarmism.
Some of the major disadvantages of wind energy are that no electricity is produced if there is no wind, it is expensive to install, big acreages of land have to be used, and the turbines kill birds. Regarding solar power, as solar systems rely on the steady absorption of sunlight, Illinois has a solar power disadvantage given its many cloudy and sunless days. Then too solar panels gradually become damaged by ultraviolet radiation. Rain, snow, dirt, temperature fluctuations, hail and wind also pose serious hazards. Solar panels are also costly to install and they do emit environmental pollutants.
In keeping with the expressed goal of the Cherokee students, how to turn their ideas into law, IL Representative Scott Drury informed the eager and attentive children of a bill he is proposing that would require 35% of Illinois’s power to come from renewable sources by 2030 and to further reduce the amount of energy used 20% by 2025.
Does Representative Scott Drury really understand the implications of his bill on the people of Illinois? To which these questions might be posed to Drury: “Are we going to cover all of Illinois with windmills?” And what about solar panels, Representative Drury? How effective are they here in northern Illinois? It is evident that 4th grade students at Cherokee Elementary School have been well trained to accept global warming as real. For when Drury asked the students their opinions on renewable energy vs. the effects of global warming and the problems caused by fossil fuel, most hands went up in support of the environmental platform.
The sun and the wind might be free, but converting them to reliable electricity is expensive, if not impossible to do. Even when the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow, we still expect electricity for all our needs, meaning that backup power on demand is required. In Illinois coal presently supplies 40% of its power, yet a coal power plant in Waukegan, IL (about 10 miles north of Lake Forest) was used as an example by a Sierra Club representative to convey to Cherokee students how smoke from burning coal, a fossil fuel, produces mercury which goes into the water and the air and can cause asthma. The same representative informed the class of 4th graders that coal burning caused global warming and that the use of renewable energy would arrest the trend.
Already the EPA’s (Environmental Protection Agency) absurd restrictions on limiting CO2 emissions have forced the closure of many coal-fired plants that are needed to provide low cost electricity. Does it really make sense for the EPA to impose draconian measures here in this nation, while leaders of the European Union are moving away from green policies that have resulted in driving up the cost of electricity across Europe?
Following are some basic facts about Global Warming that are in direct contrast to the spoon-fed pabulum that is being force-fed as undisputed fact through the mainstream media and our government-sanctioned educational system.
- There is no scientific consensus on the human role in climate change.
- Future warming due to human greenhouse gas emissions will be much less than the United Nations forecasts.
- Carbon dioxide has not caused weather to become more extreme, polar ice and sea ice to melt, or sea level rise to accelerate.
- Reducing carbon dioxide emissions is extremely expensive and won’t affect the weather.
- Public policies should aim at fostering economic growth to adapt to natural climate change.
In other words:
- Scientists don’t know how much of the global warming (or “climate change” as it is often called now) of the twentieth century was man-made and how much is natural?
- Scientists don’t know whether temperatures in the future will be higher than they are now, or lower.
- The benefits of warmer temperatures and more carbon dioxide in the air will be greater than the costs they create for at least the next 100 years or longer.
Part 2 will present information from reliable and knowledgeable scientists and organizations to challenge those who insist that the scientific debate over global warming is over and that 97% of scientists agree human activity is causing a climate crisis that demands we move on to government directed solutions to the crisis.
[Originally published at Illinois Review]