Humanicidal Climate Change Ideology Inappropriate for School Curricula says Friends of Science Society


people in parade with multicolored placard
Photo by Markus Spiske temporausch.com on Pexels.com

CALGARY, ALBERTA (PRWEB) JULY 31, 2019

CBC News reported on July 23, 2019, that according to a study by Wynes and Nicholas (2019) on climate change in Canadian secondary schools, schools should be teaching there is an overwhelming scientific consensus, but Friends of Science Society says that’s not true, and not science – and the authors’ advice is ‘humanicidal.’

Wynes and Nicholas’ earlier study found that having one less child meant a significant reduction in a person’s carbon footprint, as reported by CBC July 13, 2017. With Canada’s birthrate at only 1.6 children, this would mean the end of Canadian society, says Friends of Science.

Belgian philosopher, author, and jurist, Drieu Godefridi, rejects the humanicidal tendencies held by some of the top climate scientists, as discussed in this Dec. 31, 2018 post on Friends of Science blog.

The consensus studies cited by Wynes and Nicholas are deeply flawed and do not prove out on closer examination, as detailed in a 2014 Friends of Science review on the 97% Consensus Myth.

Even MK Zimmerman, co-author of the consensus study Doran and Zimmerman (2009) said “This entire process has been an exercise in re-educating myself about the climate debate and, in the process, I can honestly say that I have heard very convincing arguments from all the different sides, and I think I’m actually more neutral on the issue now than I was before I started this project..” (“The Consensus on the Consensus”)

Michelle Stirling, Communications Manager for Friends of Science Society, wrote a rebuttal paper to Wynes and Nicholas (2019) which is posted on Social Science Research Network (SSRN) on the theme of “Climate Diversity is Our Strength.” Her work found that the six key educational points on climate change of Wynes and Nicholas are not supported by the evidence.

Stirling’s paper points out that Wynes and Nicholas (2019) focuses on incremental reductions by individuals, when just one container ship puts out the pollution of 50 million cars, as reported by DK Group in a 2009 Slideshare, with a large container ship emitting the carbon dioxide (CO2) of 20,000 cars. Likewise, the emissions of developing nations far outstrip those of Canada.

A report by Ottawa energy policy consultant, Robert Lyman, issued May 5, 2019, entitled “Futile Folly: Canada’s Climate Policy Goals in the Global Context,” states that: ““China’s GHG emissions in 2016 were 9,114 Mt (according to British Petroleum data). In other words, China emits more in one month than Canada does all year. The average growth in emissions in China over the past decade is 202 Mt per year. Thus, Canada’s total emissions represent about three and a half months of China’s emissions growth.”

Wynes and Nicholas had been critical of school curricula that included reference to Friends of Science Society’s work, which holds the scientific position that the sun is the main driver of climate change; described as part of the ‘polarized debate’ in the curriculum. But Wynes and Nicholas claim ‘this is concerning’ as they think that there is no polarized debate in the climate science community. The Spilman Climate Conversation debate of June 12, 2018, featuring Dr. Michael Mann, Dr. David Titley, Dr. Patrick Moore and Dr. Judith Curry is just one example of ‘climate diversity.’

Friends of Science Society says the claims of Wynes and Nicholas, if taken to heart by educators and individuals would mean pink slips for teachers and ultimately, the end of Canadian society.

See Friends of Science plain language website: climatechange101.ca

SOURCE Friends of Science

Nick & Michelle found love online.