Forum Communications reporter Grace Lyden wrote an article over the weekend blasting the energy industry for creating education curriculum which doesn’t mention global warming (or “climate change” as it is being called these days).
I’m honestly not sure what the fuss is. Teaching “climate change” in a class about energy development sounds a bit like demanding that creationism be taught in science class alongside evolution.
The curriculum developed by the state’s energy industry (which you can see here) is supposed to help develop practical knowledge about how we go about getting stuff like oil and coal out of the ground to be used to power our homes and businesses. Real “this is where the electricity for your iPad comes from” type stuff.
I should note that the curriculum is completely optional. Something the industry has made available to educators as a resource.
“Climate change” is a political construct (bordering on religion in some circles), and really has no place in that sort of curriculum. Which isn’t to say it has no place in school at all, but I’ve got to tell you as the father of two young girls current in public schools in North Dakota, they’re already being bombarded with messaging about “climate change.”
It’s already everywhere. It isn’t like the concept is being ignored entirely. And after decades of dire “climate change” predictions, and a reality that hasn’t lived up to the hype, should we really be treating the concept as fact any more?
If our kids are to study climate change, I think the most interesting lesson would be about how it’s been promoted and exploited politically. How a political movement decided to hang a lab coat on their opinions, call it “science” and then pretend their conclusions were beyond criticism.
Regardless, I think kids should be able to learn about how coal is mined and oil is extracted without being bombarded yet again with a political message about global warming.