Portland School Board Schedules Book-Burning Party

By John A. Charles, Jr.

The Portland Public School board recently voted to prohibit textbooks or classroom materials questioning the mainstream thinking about climate change.

The decision has sparked an outpouring of commentary, with many writers supportive of the School Board.

However, the wording of the Board resolution should greatly concern parents of Portland public school students. Resolution No. 5272 is two pages long, but the most chilling part is the final sentence:

“[Portland Public Schools] will abandon the use of any adopted text material that is found to express doubt about the severity of the climate crisis or its root in human activities.”

The primary purpose of education is to teach students how to be critical thinkers. Now that the School Board has declared that expressions of doubt about complex scientific topics will be banned, what is the point of going to school?

Regardless of the subject we should encourage students to be skeptical. The more questioning the better. They will be poorly prepared for adult living if they spend their childhood years being spoon-fed in schools where skepticism is prohibited.

Public education already faces a growing challenge from private schools, on-line learning, and home-based education. If Resolution 5272 is upheld, Portland Public Schools will give parents one more reason to leave.

John A. Charles, Jr. is President and CEO of Cascade Policy Institute, Oregon’s free market public policy research organization.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 05:00 | Posted in Education, Global Warming | Tagged , | 61 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Bob Clark

    Might be the lead in the pipes of government buildings getting into the heads of PPS Board members. Or, it kind of fits with the binary world of brick and mortar union stifling student capture centers. In the binary world of unions, most problems are removed by making everyone fit one size fits all. If you need to appease one or more groups, you come up with things like “White Privilege;” and you vacillate trying to sweep away conflicting equal strength groups.

    It could also be a conflict of interest where Board member Rosen who introduced this rule is pushing his consulting business in the Eco-learning, green-washing arena; his action being a show of street cred within the green carpet bagging, profiteering business.

    The baby boomer generation probably wouldn’t have put up with this dictum from authority figures. Those were the days: “don’t trust anyone over 30 years of age.”

    • DavidAppell

      Bob Clark: So what the hell do you know about the science? I’ve been reading this blog for several years, and have never see you say one intelligent thing about climate science. Not one.

      • Hall Pass Monitor

        Several years? Perhaps canine at beast!
        DA, your last call for someone to come wipe…butt lingers fresh as apparent immature disability to tie your own left dangling schmooze. .

        • HPM

          -stringz!

      • David Clark

        No science is better than your propaganda.
        BTW, one does not have to know any science to realize that the whole climate thing is a giant scam.
        Non Scientist Rob Kramer figured it out 17 years ago:
        http://robkremer.blogspot.com/2009/12/decade-of-global-warming-propaganda.html

        • DavidAppell

          There is no scientific doubt about the reality of manmade global warming, and some person’s blog hardly disproves that.

          You should make an effort to learn the science, if you can.

          • David Clark

            DavidAppell —– “There is no scientific doubt about the reality of manmade global warming,”
            ME — They why are you unable to post actual evidence to support that claim?

          • DavidAppell

            “ME — They why are you unable to post actual evidence to support that claim?”

            Are you really telling me that after all these years you have never even looked up the evidence that scientists base their AGW conclusion on?

            For shame. At least read a couple of books.

          • David Clark

            Once again your refusal shows that there is no actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.

        • DavidAppell

          “David Clark” = Jim Karlock.

      • guest

        Your gourd is fulla Appell maggot juice.
        Drain it out in sum animal farm cesspool for reconsignmnet far away to another anal verse where your specimentallity is be a copacetic blend with whine bottling of Jar Jar notes of nabob bubbling sarong.

  • Ready, aim, retire the kooks

    PPS, loaded with Nazi Gethsemane

  • Eric Shierman

    The banning of anything that questions the “severity” of climate change might actually include banning the IPCC report itself which tends to be more modest in its projections than an Oregon Environmental Council fundraising letter, (at least the letters sent out since 1996).

  • 增达信购:边看美女边赚钱,什么不干,坐收百万

    会员权益:

    ①:十级提成自动拿,逆向网赚,不用拉人,坐等收钱

    ②:百万套图打包下,高清无码,永久更新,每日增加

    ③:无限广告任意发,赠送网站,独立域名,极速空间

    【免费注册,立奖一元,网址:】

    http://www.443466534.3i4.com.cn/

  • chaamjamal

    we should question everything and the harder they try to push an agenda the greater the need to evaluate it critically. the united nations, particularly the unep and the ipcc, are pushing this agenda and students are told that they must accept it. sad day for america and for the kind of critical thinking that americans are known for.

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2794991

  • David Clark

    I’ll bet not one of them knows:
    * Nature emits 95% of the annual CO2 emissions.
    * H2O causes more warming than CO2
    * Minoan, Roman & Medieval times were warmer than now.
    *Warming in the late 1800s (before man’s CO2 was significant) was at the same rate as the recent warming.
    * The current climate is well within historical norms.
    * The ONLY basis for predicting future warming is the computer models that failed to predict the 20 cessation of warming starting that started in 1995.

    • DavidAppell

      David Clark wrote:
      I’ll bet not one of them knows:
      * Nature emits 95% of the annual CO2 emissions.”

      So why hasn’t CO2 been building up in the atmosphere since time immemorial??

      • David Clark

        CO2 levels follow temperature.
        You know that David.
        Henry’s law.

        • DavidAppell

          “CO2 levels follow temperature.”

          Why lie about this Karlock?

          CO2 and temperature are in a mutually reinforcing feedback loop. Sometimes temperature leads, sometimes CO2 leads.

          Now, when we’re digging up carbon and burning it, CO2 leads.

          This is utterly elementary and completely obvious.

          • David Clark

            DavidAppell—“CO2 and temperature are in a mutually reinforcing feedback loop”
            ME—Prove it you liar.

          • DavidAppell

            “Prove it.”

            Karlock, you don’t know nearly enough physics or mathematics to understand the proof. (I’ve never seen ANY evidence that you know any physics or mathematics.)

            But if you want to try, read Chapter 4 of Raymond Pierrehumbert’s textbook “Principles of Planetary Climate.”
            http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/earth-and-environmental-science/climatology-and-climate-change/principles-planetary-climate?format=HB

          • David Clark

            Appell–“read Chapter 4 of Raymond Pierrehumbert’s textbook “Principles of Planetary Climate.”
            There yo go again expecting us to read reams of stuff in hope it contains actual evidence.
            If the evidence was really there you would quote chapter and verse. You didn’t, It isn’t there.

            Give us a link to the chapter and verse in your citation. Show us the actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.

          • DavidAppell

            Don’t worry Karlock, I’m well aware you are completely unqualified to read and understand climate science like is presented in Pierrehumbert’s textbook.

            Did you even take freshman physics in college? Did you even go to college?

          • David Clark

            Again you refuse to supply evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming. You don’t show the evidence because there is none and you know it.

          • DavidAppell

            Would you like something a little simplier than Pierrehumbert’s textbook?

            You’ll still need to know algebra and calculus, though — there’s simply no escaping that….

          • David Clark

            Your continued inability to show actual evidence, proves that there is no evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.

          • David Clark

            Did you even take freshman physics in college? Did you even go to college?

            Did YOU?

          • DavidAppell

            I didn’t think you went to college…. No wonder you can’t understand the science.

          • David Clark

            Again you show your inability to show evidence, proving that there is no evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.

          • Appell’s Pan Doobie

            A. Chuck Wiese you cannot stand up to, dour appell.

  • barttels

    One might well expect little but more thought and speech control by the neo-progressive-authoritarian state. Onward to truthisms.

  • DavidAppell

    Why does John Charles want to mislead Portland school children’s understanding of science.

    Maybe this is why:

    http://www.desmogblog.com/cascade-policy-institute

    Donor Total
    Donors Capital Fund $1,303,600
    Jaquelin Hume Foundation $380,000
    The Roe Foundation $350,000
    The Challenge Foundation $219,368
    State Policy Network $204,822
    Castle Rock Foundation $170,000
    Cato Institute $146,500
    JM Foundation $130,000
    Ruth & Lovett Peters Foundation $125,000
    Chase Foundation of Virginia $104,500
    Searle Freedom Trust $30,000
    The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation $25,000
    DonorsTrust $7,500
    Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice $1,000
    Grand Total $3,197,290

    • David Clark

      Notice that David attacks the person instead of the argument. That is because he cannot attack the argument.

      • DavidAppell

        Notice you avoided answering the question….

        • David Clark

          DavidAppell—“Notice you avoided answering the question.”
          ME — what question?
          John Charles is NOT trying to “mislead Portland school children’s understanding of science.” He is trying to stop blatant censorship of opposing ideas. BTW- We re still waiting for actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.

          • DavidAppell

            John Charles wants to feed bad information into kid’s heads — because that supports the agenda of the corporations and foundations who pay him and the CPI.

            The “opposing ideas” to manmade global warming have all been proven wrong, time and time again, while the AGW hypothesis continues to explain observations. This has been known for many decades.

            Should Portland school children also be taught phlogiston theory?

          • David Clark

            Again David shows his lack of understanding science by saying “The “opposing ideas” to man made global warming have all been proven wrong, time and time again,”
            That is not the way science works, it is his side’s duty to show the evidence. He does not because he there in none.

          • DavidAppell

            I’m still chucking because you’ve been arguing against AGW for years but have never tried to look up the evidence for it.

            What a joke.

          • David Clark

            Again you refuse to supply evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming. That is further evidence that there is NO EVIDENCE that man’ s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.

          • DavidAppell

            Why have you never taken even a few minutes to look up the evidence for AGW?

            Really, why?

          • David Clark

            Why don’t you take a few seconds to show actual evidence? That proves that there is no evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.

          • DavidAppell

            Karlock, you’re so uneducated you can only ask, like some monkey, the same old question for several years now. When it has been answered many many times now. (Don’t lie and claim otherwise.)

          • David Clark

            David, we are still waiting for you to show actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.
            It should be obvious, to everyone, that you cannot because there is NO EVIDENCE. Otherwise you would just paste it here.

          • Crepe’ Crusadore

            DavidAppell Karnac, not nerdly as funny as Johnny Carson – still, DA flits vainly about acting like he’s a turban legend.

          • DavidAppell

            Go study the science, Karlock. You might even learn somethig.

          • David Clark

            Again, you are unable to show actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.
            It should be obvious, to everyone, there is NO EVIDENCE. Otherwise you would just paste it here.

          • David Clark
      • DavidAppell

        “David Clark” = Jim Karlock, a notorious Portland pest.

    • DDT the Noxious Pestilence.

      Whap abut the Hillary Fumdation PAC’d with lodes of NWO and all Goreing shoe flu highs?

  • DavidAppell

    “On climate change, no need to teach both sides (OPINION),” David Appell, Oregonian 6/6/16
    http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/06/on_climate_change_no_need_to_t.html

    • David Clark

      Pure propaganda from David Appell. For the truth with links to primary sources see:
      DebunkingClimate.com
      PS: David has been asked many times over several years to shopw actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.
      He has yet to show qany actual evidence. But he has:
      1. Provided links to hundreds of pages that he expects to search.
      2. Said CO2 is a greenhouse gas therefore man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.

      3. Claimed he has provided evidence in the past. (Yeah, like the above.)

      • DavidAppell

        “David Clark” = Jim Karlock, lying about this identity again.

        I’ve answered Karlock’s questions time and time again. Unfortunately he can’t understand the answers.

        • David Clark

          DavidAppell
          —I’ve answered Karlock’s questions time and time again
          ME— Appell, you have NEVER shown any actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming. Typically you state CO2 is a greenhouse gas, therefore it will cause the earth to warm out of control. A statement is not proof. The closest you came was to refer to some IPCC computer simulation which shows that man’s CO2 is needed to make the models work. Just a few problems: the models are crap – they failed to predect the dramatic slowing in warming over the last 20 years. They over predict warming by about a factor of 3. They falsely predict a mid latitude troposphere hot spot.

          BTW, David, if you had actual evidence you would just re-post it, instead of claiming that you had posted it.

          • DavidAppell

            You’re lying, Karlock. As you know.

          • David Clark

            No David, your inability to show evidence, shows that there is no actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming.

  • David Clark

    A look at climate history shows that our current climate is COOLER than earlier times. These historical warmer times were also times of plenty and great human progress. The cooler times in between were no so much.
    Here is 4000 years of history that totally debunk Al Gore’s climate scam:
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/22/climate-and-human-civilization-for-the-past-4000-years/

  • David Clark

    Here is one expert’s analysis of the global warming scam:
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/26/the-tangled-web-of-global-warming-activism/

  • David Clark
  • David Clark
  • David Clark
  • Donkey shame ewe libtards

    Feel or spiel the Bern and/or Hitlary’s under wear propagandist emeritryst, Josephine Goebbels Dummy Wasserman Schultzenslimer, barker at anal Goreon FreakShow, twits up with jackass intertwined manure-spreaders.

    Lo, the stain of blue bayou betal nuts remains indelible in their rants -ranking incontinent effluent abut spreading viral effluent sans sanitary containment .

    Buy the same token, das PPS Kristallnacht burns brightly fueled by underground flatulence airing from Nazionale Socialist Entrepreneurs bunkering down where David Appell foments his Mein Kamphors. Ack!

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)