Wyoming doesn’t want its kids to learn about climate change

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Last month ####### Cheney’s home statepassed a budget with a footnote that prohibits the use of public funds to adopt the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). The standards were recently developed by the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, in concert with 26 states. They’re intended to replace a hodgepodge of state standards of varying quality, providing a national framework for teaching the most up-to-date science. Naturally, this includes climate change (though the climate sections were watered down).

But Republican State Rep. Matt Teeters, who holds an aptly abbreviated B.S. in political science from the University of Wyoming, knows more than all those experts. Teeters, who sponsored the budget footnote, complained that the standards “handle global warming as settled science.” And why should scientists tell everyone else what constitutes “settled science”? (Teeters did not respond to a call from Grist, which was hoping to ask whether he intends to also remove gravity from the state science curriculum.)

Republican Gov. Matt Mead signed the budget into law, and declined to use his line-item veto to get rid of the anti-NGSS footnote. Mead, who got his bachelor’s degree in “radio/television” from Trinity University in Texas, also knows more about climate science than the NGSS authors. He has previously said, “I am unconvinced that climate change is man-made, but I do recognize we may face challenges presented by those who propose and believe they can change our climate by law with ill-thought-out policy like cap and trade.” In fact, his administration has no shortage of geniuses who know more about science than any scientist. State education board chair Ron Micheli told the Casper Star-Tribune, “I don’t accept, personally, that [climate change] is a fact.” Micheli, a rancher by trade, received a B.S. in animal science from the University of Wyoming. He was voted “Outstanding Animal Science Student” by the agriculture honorary fraternity Alpha Zeta. How many members of the IPCC can say that?

Wyomingites with experience in science education support the NGSS. Before the legislature passed its budget, a state education committee of about 30 experts unanimously recommended adoption of the standards. And earlier this month, a coalition of concerned scientists and educators — including the Wyoming Science Teachers Association, the Wyoming Education Association, the American Meteorological Society, and the Union of Concerned Scientists — sent a letter to the state board of education expressing their disapproval of the anti-NGSS footnote. Since the budget applies to the next fiscal year, starting July 1, they called on the board to implement the new standards right now, before it is prohibited.

Mead’s education policy advisor Mary Kay Hill rejected the request. “Governor Mead has expressed concern with the role that scientists play in coming to political conclusions regarding climate change,” shewrote in a letter in response. Hill added, in a turn of phrase that would make even one of George Orwell’s villains blush, “The state’s science standards should be written to ensure that a science education is free from political influence.”

Wyoming is the first state to outright reject the NGSS. (At least 10 states have officially adopted the standards, and others are in the process of doing so; all in all, more than half of states are expected to come on board.) Some conservative complaints about the science standards have come from religious zealots angry over the teaching of evolution, but that doesn’t seem to have been a decisive factor in Wyoming, which is not an especially religious state. It is extremely conservative, but so are a lot of states.

What makes Wyoming special is its dependence on fossil fuel extraction. Wyoming is the country’s largest producer of coal. In 2012 it accounted for 39.5 percent of the U.S. total, nearly four times the production of second-place West Virginia. Wyoming is the eighth largest producer of oil in the U.S. and the fifth largest producer of natural gas. Wyoming does not have an income tax because it draws so much revenue from taxes on its extractive industries. Another big industry in the state is cattle ranching — beef and veal account for 78 percent of its agricultural revenue — and that too contributes to climate change thanks to farting and belching livestock. Wyoming residents and businesses are also energy hogs. They consume the most energy per capita of any state.

So Wyoming’s politicians worry that if they admit climate change is happening, that implies action should be taken, action that could harm the state’s economy. “There’s all kind of social implications involved in [acknowledging climate change] that I don’t think would be good for Wyoming,” said Teeters. At a board of education meeting on April 11, Micheli said that climate change education “has to be based on the economy of this state.” In case you’re wondering what that means, he was quite clear: “This state’s economy is based on fossil fuels,” so people should “talk about the benefits that accrued to our industrial society because of the institution of fossil fuels.” Still, Micheli insisted that he’s fine with some teaching of climate change — “but don’t offer it as the only alternative that’s there.”

Fossil fuel interests have always been powerful in Wyoming, say political experts. Conservative activists in the state “got really organized this year and filled legislators’ inboxes up with email” opposed to the NGSS, says Dan Neal, director of the Equality State Policy Center, a progressive think tank in Casper, Wyo. “We are a mineral-rich state — it’s the basis of our economy here. What we live with, as a result of that, is those guys have extraordinary power at the legislature.”

Here’s an example of that power in action: In 2012, a sculpture called Carbon Sink, made from wood destroyed by an infestation of pine bark beetles — which has been linked to climate change — was removed from the University of Wyoming campus in Laramie under political pressure. As Slate reported, “After the university announced the installation of Carbon Sink, Marion Loomis, the president of the Wyoming Mining Association, wrote to a university official and asked: ‘What kind of ####### is this?‘ Both industry representatives and state legislators weighed in on the sculpture, some threatening the university’s funding in no uncertain terms.” The university’s president caved.

http://grist.org/politics/wyoming-doesnt-want-its-kids-to-learn-about-climate-change/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=update&utm_campaign=socialflow

Edited April 23, 2014 by Porterhouse

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Evidently, Wyoming believes in the separation of church and state, so no Gaia worship on campus.

[Danno 1,228]

Finally another State putting it's foot down on this foolishness.

Think of it this way.... they are preserving respect for science.

You don't want them kids growing up like me having been taught things about science only to later find out....

No we are not heading into and Ice age.

No, half the world will not be starving by 1982.

No, we will not be walking around in respirators because of poor air quality.

No the world did not become over populated by 1990.

No we won't have to buy the water we drink......... ok, so they were kinda right on that but thats just because it's a fad, not really necessary.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Marion Loomis, the president of the Wyoming Mining Association, wrote to a university official and asked: ‘What kind of ####### is this?‘

Exactly.

[Peikko 1,575]

Finally another State putting it's foot down on this foolishness.

Think of it this way.... they are preserving respect for science.

You don't want them kids growing up like me having been taught things about science only to later find out....

No we are not heading into and Ice age.

No, half the world will not be starving by 1982.

No, we will not be walking around in respirators because of poor air quality.

No the world did not become over populated by 1990.

No we won't have to buy the water we drink......... ok, so they were kinda right on that but thats just because it's a fad, not really necessary.

Is that what you learned out of your science classes? Science classes in my neck of the woods consisted of, well, science not bizarre predictions about what the world might look like in 2014 if....

[Danno 1,228]

Is that what you learned out of your science classes? Science classes in my neck of the woods consisted of, well, science not bizarre predictions about what the world might look like in 2014 if....

Your Joking right?

If not you are admitting any Lesson on Global warming is "bizarre predictions" and are best left out of the classroom.

[Peikko 1,575]

Your Joking right?

If not you are admitting any Lesson on Global warming is "bizarre predictions" and are best left out of the classroom.

Only you could draw that conclusion from what I posted. Good luck with that.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Wyoming? Does anyone live there?

[Danno 1,228]

Wyoming? Does anyone live there?

Has anyone spent a weekend there (Jackson hole does not count)?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Wyoming? Does anyone live there?

Cows.

[Rattlehead 69]

Cows.

The same motherf******s who produce the majority of the methane. No wonder they don't want to the hear the Gospel According to Al.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Is that what you learned out of your science classes?

Don't be ridiculous. Danno didn't take science classes. Science classes are just a big fraud. He took scripture instead. It's how he turned out special like that.

[Danno 1,228]

Don't be ridiculous. Danno didn't take science classes. Science classes are just a big fraud. He took scripture instead. It's how he turned out special like that.

Lets be honest BD, I could have cut both classes and I would still wipe the floor with you.

But you keep coming back for more and I admire that about you.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Lets be honest BD, I could have cut both classes and I would still wipe the floor with you.

But you keep coming back for more and I admire that about you.

[Peikko 1,575]

Lets be honest BD, I could have cut both classes and I would still wipe the floor with you.

But you keep coming back for more and I admire that about you.

Both classes? Back home in the old country science consisted of three main areas, chemistry, physics and biology. In my day, if you had any smarts at all you took all three subjects concurrently. In the US it seems you can only manage one 'science' at a time. Very, very odd.