Sunday, March 18, 2007

Global Warming Cures Might Be Worse Than The Disease

There's even a reference to Mt. Pinatubo in this article, but not to the fact that it spewed more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere in one eruption that mankind has in his entire history as a species. While I don't agree entirely with the following quote, it does point out a little of the inconsistency of those who want to try to "fix" what we've "broken":

Kevin Trenberth, climate analysis chief at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, said mankind already has harmed Earth's climate inadvertently, so it's foolish to think that people can now fix it with a few drastic measures.


Update: I've updated this global warming post a few times in the last few days. Go take a look-see.

Update #2, 3/19/07: Here's a nifty post about the Scientific Method as it applies to global warming hysteria.

100 MPG? How About 300 MPG?

There are plenty of good reasons to want to cut down on pollution--and no, so-called global warming isn't one of them. I've long believed that in places like the Central Valley of California, and the eastern slope of the Rockies--places that get over 300 days of sunlight a year--we're passing up on essentially free electricity every day we don't have solar cells on the roof. I'm not against cutting down on emissions, I'm against the scare tactics and fake science that are part and parcel of the Church of Global Warming.

Cars. Cars burn a lot of gas in this country (and every other country, for that matter). What can we do about that? Hydrogen? Bio-diesel? I don't like either of those solutions. They might be part of an overall solution, but neither one is going to carry the entire burden of reducing oil consumption. I still like electric cars, charged at night with electricity produced from clean, efficient nuclear power. But there are still technology improvements in batteries needed to make that a reality. So what can we do today?

How about these ideas?

Teacher Biases

Ms. Cornelius has an excellent post about teacher biases entering the classroom. While I don't agree with her 100% on this case, I'm sure we're above 80% here. I clarified my position in a comment to her post.

When we discuss current events and the like in my class, I give students my opinion--and they know it's mine. They know I'm not sugar-coating it for their delicate ears. They also don't have to worry about their grade dropping if they don't share my opinion (I teach math)--I'm not so sure they're as safe in an English or social science class.

Modern Marxism

Most Americans today would have to admit, however grudgingly (lefties), that, given reasonable evidence, that Marxism doesn't work. Can they name one, one, workers' paradise? Can they name one, one, with even a slightly good record on the environment? Can they name one, one, that wasn't a police state?

I say most, because there is a segment of America that still longs for Marx, and for Stalin, and for Mao. That segment exists in the field of education.

This Washington Times commentary struck many chords, but this one jumped out at me:

Here is a parallel statement from the Kansas State University catalogue: "To qualify for a Bachelor of Arts or a Bachelor of Science in Women's Studies at Kansas State University, students will have demonstrated their familiarity with key Women's Studies concepts such as the social construction of gender, oppression of and violence against women, heterosexism, racism, classism, and global inequality."

In other words, a student cannot graduate from the Kansas State Women's Studies program unless that student believes in the ideology that makes up its core, and demonstrate that belief. Yet the ideological premise is scientifically challenged -- a fact the program does not acknowledge. In the catalogue descriptions of more than 100 Women's Studies courses I have personally examined, these are common themes.

Marx.

I've blogged about such courses before (click on the higher education label) and the author of the linked piece has other examples. That author is David Horowitz, so lefties and Jew-haters (repetitious?) can automatically discount that commentary and this blog post. The rest of us, though, will keep in mind that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance--often against the 5th columnists among us.

Update: Quite coincidentally, I came upon this article about Marxism, et. al., by someone who grew up in the Soviet Union. I highly recommend reading it. It weaves the Beatles, anti-American peace rallies, and communist apparatchiks into one amazing tapestry. Be sure to focus on the Gospel of John and Yoko.

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Climate Change Deniers v. Climate Change Fascists

Ker-plunk has a great post about a debate between the two groups, a debate for which the science is supposed to be settled, remember?

Here are the participants, as well as some commentary:

The Deniers were:

- Michael Crichton
- Richard Lindzen
- Philip Stott

The Fascists were:

- Brenda Ekwurzel
- Gavin Schmidt
- Richard Somerville


Before the debate started the audience's position on Global warming is not a crisis was as follows:

30% Agree
57% Disagree
13% Undecided

After the debate the audience was polled again, with the following outcome:

46% Agree
42% Disagree
12% Undecided

How can it be that such a massive swing took place in the space of a couple of hours? If the 'science is settled' then why were the Climate Fascists not only not able to hold their position but actually increase it? And why would Gavin 'the debate is over' Schmidt even agree to a debate in the first place?

I forgot to mention that this debate has not been widely reported in the mainstream media. If the Fascists had won then do you think it wouldn't have been splattered all over the media?



Word.

Cal-Berkeley To Get A New Vice Chancellor

Via Instapundit (see blogroll at left):

The University of California at Berkeley is looking to hire its first Vice Chancellor for Equity and Inclusion, and I think it's about darn time. I'm heartened to know that with this renewed focus on recruiting students and faculty from underrepresented groups, Berkeley's agents will soon be scouring Iowa for devout homeschooled virgin boys. Young men returning from service in Iraq, likewise, may find a warmer reception than they would have received in years past. And no doubt many young parents, as well as retired executives, will soon be submitting their applications to the more equitable and inclusive Cal-Berkeley. Observant pro-war Jews, aspiring Christian filmmakers, chaste young pro-life activists — all are welcome under Berkeley's big tent, right?

I mean, surely this isn't a guise to continue the insular practice of recruiting from a narrow slice of the American political, geographic, religious, and social strata, is it?


Mr. Woodlief obviously gets it.

Friday, March 16, 2007

Too Good To Be True?

One of the science teachers at my school showed Gore's An Inconvenient Truth to his science class and afterwards, according to several students who couldn't wait to tell me, said something like, "Now you've seen the future. You can either do something about it, or keep your head in the sand."

Keep your head in the sand? At least he could have used the word struthious.

That same day I was directed, on one of the many blogs I read, to a NY Times piece that mentioned only a few of the criticisms that have been directed at that film and at the notion of man-caused global warming--some of which I've identified in other posts here at Right on the Left Coast. I thought it would be interesting to send the NYT piece to this teacher to see what he thought.

He replied that he'd give a copy of it to each of the students who saw the movie, and allow them to come to their own conclusions.

Granted, the article was weak indeed. It didn't address some of the obvious criticisms or bring up some of the science that discounts the theory. But for the NYT, it was pretty good.

And I was impressed that this teacher responded the way he did. Since the science isn't settled, we should be giving both sides of the issue. Only more inquiry will lead us to the truth, whatever that is; stifling inquiry by declaring the debate "closed" would be heading in the wrong direction.

I haven't heard yet if he's handed the article out or not.

Teaching and Accountability

Right on the tails of recent posts about teacher accountability and NCLB, I read a post today (via Joanne--see blogroll at left) that was full of wisdom.

As teachers, you cannot simultaneously negotiate evaluation-proof work conditions on the one hand, and instructional autonomy on the other. If evaluations continue to focus on teacher actions -- objectives posted, adherence to 5-step lesson plan, etc. -- rather than student outcomes, if there continues to be no accepted tool to measure teacher effectiveness, if we reject the very notion that certain educators may be superior instructors because of what they do and not what the kids bring relative to their demographics, than you don't get autonomy. You can't.


Put simply, there has to be some check on our behavior and performance. We can't "negotiate evaluation-proof work conditions" and also expect to be able to teach whatever and however we want. Someone, somewhere, has to have some influence over what we do in the classroom. They either have to be able to evaluate our effectiveness, or at least insist on the curriculum we teach.

I really liked the next paragraph:

Dig it: As a teacher I should get to teach whatever I want because I know best and no one is allowed to determine if what I taught or how I taught it was important, valid, or successful because I earned tenure in the name of academic freedom.

That's the argument our profession makes. It's weak sauce.


So how do we fix this? I prefer a little accountability, myself. I'm not afraid of it at all.

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Teaching About Burqas

Let's say, for instance, that a school has its female students wear burqas as part of a lesson. What would that lesson be, do you think? Would it be about how women are devalued in some cultures? Would it be how oppressed women are in some cultures?

No, of course not. It would be about how intolerant American high school students are towards people dressed like the people with whom we're in a war.

As Charles at LGF (see blogroll at left) says:

They’re so focused on teaching these kids “tolerance,” they don’t even see the blatant misogyny of the burqa.


There are people who want us to lose this war, and many of them are American.

More Studies. What Will Be Done For California Education?

Sometimes it seems like you can't swing a cat by the tail without hitting some new study about what's needed in education. Now is no exception.

The suggestions are part of a package of more than 20 academic studies commissioned by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and other political leaders. The first was released Wednesday and will be given to a bipartisan committee examining the state's public education system that will make recommendations later this year.

Schwarzenegger said that spending more money without substantial changes to the way California distributes funding won't do much to help students or fix schools. The governor said extensive reforms could save the state billions of dollars that can be reinvested in classrooms.


So what do we learn several paragraphs later?

Many of the conclusions in the report stem from familiar criticisms. The research does not suggest specific policy changes but does offer general fixes. They include simplifying state regulations so schools have greater control over their budgets, revising teacher evaluation and salary schedules, and lengthening the school day for schools with many poor and minority students.

The studies also said California needs to revamp its teacher assessments, including one report in which principals stressed their desire for an easier way to fire teachers without bureaucratic hurdles.

Barbara Kerr, president of the California Teachers Association, the state's largest lobbying group, noted that California voters rejected a 2005 Schwarzenegger initiative that would have extended teachers' probationary period from two years to five. Teachers can be fired without cause during that period.


Leave it to Boss Kerr.

I'm curious about one thing, however. What, exactly, is a bad teacher? We all know who they are, but how do we objectively identify them? How many do we have to fire before all the children learn? The devil's in them details, boy, and Boss Kerr ain't gonna help you git to that devil.

While I Don't Agree With The Politics...

...I find this Iraq War parody to be wildly entertaining.

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

A Witch, and Something That Rhymes With It

And she didn't even turn me into a newt. (If she did, I got bet'ah.)

CENTRAL ISLIP, New York (AP) -- A teacher who alleged that she was fired from her job because administrators thought she was a witch lost her $2 million lawsuit in U.S. District Court on Tuesday.

The jury deliberated for an hour before deciding that Lauren Berrios, 37, wasn't entitled to any money from the Hampton Bays school district, her ex-employer. The trial began March 7.


Maybe she could have peered into her crystal ball and foreseen the future. Or read some goat entrails. Or something.

I'm sure some will view those comments as insensitive towards Wiccans. They aren't meant to be. They're meant to be jokes with a foundation in the historical Western presentation of witch. The fact that I feel I have to say that to stave off whining says much about how I view our culture today.

Carnival of Education

There's quite the selection of articles and topics at this week's Carnival of Education, hosted at home at the Education Wonks (see blogroll at left).

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

New Global Warming Post

I guess I'm in a big linking mood tonight. Not to worry, though--I'm working on a good self-written post, I'm just waiting for the big event to happen so I can blog about it.

Until then, though, let's go to a great Australian blog, and one of the newest on the blogroll at left, Ker-plunk. Why Ker-plunk for a title?

One day Chicken Little was walking in the woods when - KERPLUNK! - an acorn fell on her head. "Oh my goodness!" said Chicken Little. "The sky is falling! I must go and tell the king."


And so the blog begins.

Today we can read Ker-plunk's "10 Questions For Climate Fascists".

1. When did the debate end?
2. How is the science settled?
3. How do you explain this? (see picture at link)
4. What the heck has happened to the Hockey stick?
5. Why believe climate models?
6. Why is symbolism more important than effectiveness?
7. Why the IPCC censorship?
8. Why are all the predictions of only doom and gloom?
9. What caused the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age?
10. Why the hooey about sinking islands?


I'll add an 11th question: Why must you physically threaten and harass scientists who don't agree with you?

Press Bias In Education Media!

Discriminations (see blogroll at left) is on a roll tonight!

On one level what seemed to be the theme and purpose of this panel — helping diversity officers figure out how to pitch their pet programs to the press — would have struck many professional journalists as inherently problematical, or at least it would have in the old days. Even today I suspect eyebrows would be raised in some circles if reporters covering politics for the mainstream press appeared on a panel at a meeting of partisan political consultants to one party designed to help them hone their message...

He (
Scott Jaschik of InsideHigher Ed) went way, way beyond telling his audience to “tell me what I should write,” an invitation that he attempted to cover with the pro-forma declaration that he might not always accede to their wishes. Mentioning several times that the “critics of affirmative action” were much better at dealing with the press, he “volunteered some help” at press relations, help that he offered to keep “completely off the record,” that suggests an unusual (or at least I hope it is unusual) view of the role of the press.

He offered, for example, to hold off the record coaching sessions where he would “pretend that I’m Fox News” and ask the sort of questions Fox News would ask. “It’s not my job as a journalist to tell you what to say,” he said with what sounded like a wink, “but I can tell you how it sounds.”


I'd be more OK with this is members of the press admitted their biases up front, like I do here at Right On The Left Coast. At least then you're better able to judge their veracity instead of buying into the lie of objectivity.

Do We Really Need This Organization? Really?

The National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE)

Hat tip to Discriminations (see blogroll at left)

Dress Code at University Restaurant Is Racist?

John at Discriminations (see blogroll at left) links to a story about a restaurant across the street from the University of Virginia, a restaurant that has instituted a dress and behavior code so that the dining experience will be better for all patrons.

The dress code, established last semester, prohibits hats without brims, baggy clothing, sweatpants, plain white t-shirts and camouflage unless worn by a member of the Armed Forces.

The dress code, established last semester, prohibits hats without brims, baggy clothing, sweatpants, plain white t-shirts and camouflage unless worn by a member of the Armed Forces.


Whether or not you agree with the dress code, I can't see that it targets any race(s) in particular. But you know that's not what the whiners are saying. John says it best:

Add good manners and presentable dress to the list of things that it is racist to expect of minority students.


Update, 3/15/07: I've corrected the location of the restaurant. John at Discriminations answered my question:

No, not on the UVa grounds (campus). "The Corner" is a couple of blocks of restaurants, funky shops, etc., right across the street from the main grouns at UVa. Sort of a student hang-out area, but all the shops, restaurants, etc. are private.


Good for the owner for establishing what should be societally-accepted norms.

I May Have To Reconsider Getting a Prius...

...if this is true.

Monday, March 12, 2007

New View of Emigrant Gap

A couple weeks ago I posted a panoramic picture of the Emigrant Gap region, off Interstate 80 on the way to Reno. There was no snow.

I went skiing this weekend, and a tiny bit of snow had fallen in the interim.

Old picture:



New picture:


It's a little bit of difference, but not much.

Union Goings-On

This week's EIA (see blogroll at left) Communique gives us some interesting union stories from around the country:

NEA to Revive Booster Club Proposal. NEA's attempt to create a category of associate membership fell short at last year's convention, but the union will try again this July in Philadelphia. This would open NEA membership to people not employed in public education. Why? Well, as EIA revealed last year, NEA can only collect PAC money from members, so associate membership would help the union deal with its collection problem. Only seven percent of NEA members currently donate to the national PAC.

There will also be a proposal to immediately increase contributions to the union's ballot initiative and legislative crisis fund to $10 per member per year. The money is disseminated to state affiliates to support or defeat ballot measures or legislation the union deems important. This proposal simply accelerates a previously approved gradual increase to the fund.

During the 2006 campaign, NEA divided its staff into two groups and placed a virtual wall between them, in order to allow one group to operate in support of candidates and subject to federal election regulations, and the other to distance itself from candidates, but operate under the rules of union political activity. This must have worked well because NEA will make the set-up permanent. The union's Government Relations department will now have a Public Policy section to handled traditional lobbying activities, while the Campaigns and Elections section will work to recruit and support candidates for federal office.


Sault Tribe Charter Teachers Eject Union. It dragged on for a long time, and was a mishmash of conflicting national and state labor laws, charter school authorization policies, tribal sovereignty and internal tribe politics, but teachers at the Joseph K. Lumsden Bahweting Anishnabe charter school voted 19-13 to decertify the Michigan Education Association as its bargaining representative.

The school is associated with the Sault Tribe of Chippewas, whose leadership was very much opposed to the union presence. The intensity of feelings about the school on both sides was illustrated by the hundreds of comments posted by tribe members on Intercepts when EIA reported the story in October 2005.


Off the Reservation in San Diego. There have been fewer and fewer fireworks at the annual NEA convention as the years have gone by, but we may see some this year over NEA's "fix and fund" policy for the No Child Left Behind Act. The board of directors of the San Diego Education Association passed a resolution that states, in part, that NCLB "cannot be overhauled, fixed or properly funded," and instructs SDEA delegates to the NEA convention to introduce a new business item that would support scrapping NCLB entirely.

We can expect opposition to this at national NEA similar to that demonstrated against the petition championed by Susan Ohanian last December (see Item #2 here).


Interesting.