Whatās the point of teaching children to deny climate change? So that they wonāt go and find a solution? Are they trying to eliminate human beings?
Let me guessā¦big oil is now lobbying for changes in our education so they can keep making money and ruining the planet
what good is money for if we all die
The world isnāt going to die overnight, itās going to happen slowly, and itās already started. Failed crops, mass migration, water shortages, etc. The rich need to maintain the ability to influence policies like immigration to stretch out their miserable existance.
The rich think theyāll live in opulent bunkers.
It doesnāt seem to occur to them that theyāll be killed and eaten by their own security guards, once the collapse of civilization renders their money moot.
But we will all be dead by then.
I believe that they are direct funders of PragerU actually yes.
A lot of these religious folks think the apocalypse canāt get here great enough, so they are helping
doesnāt make a lot of sense either - like, theyāre going to Heaven when they die or.if the rapture happens, so whatās the rush?
Fundies often expect the world to end any moment now and for Supply-Side Jesus to further comfort the comforted and to send the afflicted to further affliction.
Calvinism, in all its spinoffs, is a fuck.
At this point I think there might just be an element of pure reaction and contrarianism involved. Dyingās worth it as long as you own the commie nazi libs or whatever
Yeah Iām seeing this at the level of my provincial government (Alberta) all green energy projects being indefinitely canceled/ not being approved in favor of oil and gas based power. Ostensibly to protect jobs but the rhetoric used about it clearly just being backlash against the commie libs (and Turdeau of course)
Teach 'em young to get more votes. Republicans have been playing the long game for generations now.
If anyone has not previously googled for PragerU content, you should. I watched a couple vids and looked at images from a textbook awhile ago. Youāll be sure itās either satire or fake. Best as I can tell, itās neither. That makes it scary.
For those that want to be informed, hereās the animation produced by PragerU and enforced for the Florida schoolās curriculum:
https://www.prageru.com/video/poland-anias-energy-crisis
And hereās a more thorough article with facts and details, that does beyond calling a Reddit user and expert for a clickbait headline:
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2023/08/prageru-climate-skeptic-science-florida-education/
Review the details and draw your own conclusions, donāt listen to Reddit (or Lemmy) users. Because knowing is half the battle.
The problem is that there are grains of truth here, but a lot of emotional manipulation, such as:
- Aniaās friends stop talking to her - is this actually likely to happen?
- Ania doesnāt feel questions are welcome - every teacher Iāve had will return some days later with answers to relevant questions they couldnāt readily answer
Polandās leaders promised to cut all coal production by 2049
Yet the video focuses on the Russia-Ukraine war. Surely that war wonāt last for the next 26 years. I think the world would accept going back to coal (perhaps from non-Russian sources) until natural gas can be sourced elsewhere or replaced by something else. 26 years is a long time, and they could totally build nuclear plants in that time. They have the international agreements in place, so it shouldnāt be a huge issue to roll that out by the stated timeline.
Had they started rolling it out sooner they would already have a backup plan to Russian natural gas and coal.
So the main thrust of the videos i completely fine, but it sets up a strawman pitting two all-or-nothing approaches (switch 100% to green energy today or abandon green energy).
Iām not going to go through the full video as the motherjones article does that already, but I do also want to point out that motherjones is pushing a heavy narrative as well, such as:
While no school district has announced plans to show any of PragerUās videos, NPR reports, thereās nothing to stop teachers from independently airing the material
Theyāre making a huge deal out of something relatively small. Basically, Florida has stated that schools may use PragerUās content, not that they have to or should use that content, only that itās allowed.
The important thing is how itās presented. I think this video would be interesting for in-class discussion, especially when shown alongside a video with the opposite perspective. It could raise interesting questions, such as:
- how quickly should countries/states switch to green energy?
- how do we balance local needs and global concerns?
- is going backward when an emergency comes up a bad thing? How long is acceptable for a ātemporaryā step back?
I think itās also interesting from a āhow bias can impact the presentationā discussion. So I 100% agree with it being allowed to be used in schools, but I think that should be followed up with some kind of auditing process to make sure itās being used appropriately, and that process should be as open as possible.
deleted by creator
Logic and critical thinking was a third year courseā¦ in collegeā¦ and was a freaking elective.
I remember being in the class and thinking that this probably would have been good to know before deciding what college or major to pick.
Citizens who can logically assess information in a systematic manner are less easy to control.
Just a reminder that PragerU made a video defending racism and slavery.
Thanos was right. Some greater-being should just snap some part of humanity out of existence. Just not the random half, but those who actively try to ruin it for the others.
Is anyone able to find these videos on the Florida list of approved materials? I found statements from state officials that Prager is included, but I donāt see it in any official documents or [teacher resource lists](https://www.flimadoption.org/Bids/Adopted Materials). Iād love some help digging it up so I can get involved.
Zoe Bee did a great video recently where she broke down some of the PragerU teaching materials from a teaching materials. Theyāre worse than I expected.
I wonder if other well-known industry groups are also called our for their propganda? For example recycling is pushed by the plastic industry, the notion of āclean coalā is pushed by coal mining, and of course the entire notion of volunteering for charity is just Capitalism ensuring that societal problems will never try to be tackled by a Government.
This is no different.
What schools are teaching clean coal as part of their curriculum? And yes, even ineffective solutions like recycling are extremely different and far better than teaching kids outright denial.
I donāt know any specific school that is teaching clean coal, however there is nothing at any school district that would preclude clean coal from being discussed as an answer to climate change. Much like the PragerU videos. No school district is currently using those videos, but there is nothing stopping any school from using them which is what the whole article is about.
Iām eager for The Audit to return.
The āexpertā quoted was an unidentified Reddit user! Nowhere in the article was it stated what was being taught. This isnāt an article for information, itās just an attempt to fan the flames of division.
Not saying I agree or not with whatās happening in (surprise) Florida. Just saying nothing in this article provides for discussion or critical thinking about the topic.
āItās evil more than it is stupid,ā said a Reddit user discussing the Guardian article, while another lamented the forces enabling this and anti-environmental policy planning like Project 2025 as ādoing the bidding of oil companies.ā
The Florida Department of Education has approved screening videos that deny the Earthās changing climate to schoolchildren in the state, according to the Guardian.
Animations from Prager University Foundation, a conservative group that pushes untruths about sustainable energy and the warming of the planet, will now be a part of the public school curriculum in Florida.
Seems like it says what was being taught right at the start?
They also quote a researcher at Kansas State University and itās kind of weird you glossed over that entirely to focus on the reddit user.
From Motherjones
While no school district has announced plans to show any of PragerUās videos, NPR reports, thereās nothing to stop teachers from independently airing the material. As a Florida Department of Education spokesperson said in a statement, the material aligns with Floridaās revised civics and government standards.
Not glossing over it. The first sentence is āaccording to the Guardian,ā but doesnāt actually share what was being taught. Are they properly evaluating the material? Canāt know, they didnāt state what was being shared.
Second sentence is not clarifying what is being shown, just that it comes from an organization that has an agenda.
All Iām saying here is this article is very heavy in divisiveness and absent with specific details. That should raise concern.
I click on the article to see what craziness Florida is doing now. I didnāt learn that from the article. There are plenty of links available from Prager U on the internet. Iād like to have seen exactly what are in those animations being shown to the kids. At best this is sloppy reporting not sharing those links.
They explicitly state that they are showing PragerU videos as educational material in public school. Itās as plain as day. All their videos are on youtube if you want to go look specifically at what they are showing.
All Iām saying is if someone says to me ākids are being shown bad stuffā Iād like to be able to see for myself what they are being shown to make my own decision. Just saying āitās stuff thatās made by these people who have an agendaā isnāt sufficient, in my opinion. Because it is so easy to link to the stuff as you rightfully point out, that it wasnāt makes me question the integrity of the reporting.
I donāt have an agenda. In fact, I suspect weāre on the same side of the debate. Iām in favor of critical thinking and Iām certainly not denying global warming/climate change or whatever we are calling it. To be clear: if these kids are being taught it is a hoax, thatās bad in my opinion.
But news should be informing us. And this article fails to provide us the information we need to arm ourselves against climate change deniers. All it does is say āFlorida badā and āPrager U bad.ā It doesnāt give us the details to educate us and arm us with facts. That approach to persuasion, on either side of the topic, should concern all of us.
No, you are honestly wilding out over this. The article was fine and you are in a contrarian overdrive in a way that makes me think you arenāt being entirely forthright.
I kinda agree with the guy here. I am not going to give a dumb article a pass just because I agree with its conclusions. Any ānewsā article that quotes a random Redditor as an expert is trash.
You (and @blewit) could just click where it says 'The Guardian and read the source article if you donāt think a reddit or is a good source (which it isnāt, which is why you can read supporting articles they linkā¦). Hereās a decent portion of the guardian article is below, but itās clear that PragerU is pushing objectively false propaganda to children, both downplaying the impact that current policies have on the environment and (to no oneās surprise) comparing the people who rightly fight against climate change to Nazis (instead of the people attempting to eradicate trans people like the Nazis actually did):
Videos that compare climate activists to Nazis, portray solar and wind energy as environmentally ruinous and claim that current global heating is part of natural long-term cycles will be made available to young schoolchildren in Florida, after the state approved their use in its public school curriculum.
Slickly-made animations by the Prager University Foundation, a conservative group that produces materials on science, history, gender and other topics widely criticized as distorting the truth, will be allowed to be shown to children in kindergarten to fifth grade after being adopted by Floridaās department of education.
Teachers who use the materials āwill not be reprimanded, cannot be pushed back on about it, we are approved on the curriculumā, said Jill Simonian, director of outreach at PragerU Kids, the youth arm of the organization. āMore states are following. Florida ā Iām applauding. This is step in the right direction.ā
ā¦
In one of the videos allowed by Florida, a girl in Poland called Ania is shown questioning the need to transition away from coal, a key driver of the climate crisis, to renewables. Her parents tell her that the planet has heated up and cooled since prehistoric times, even without the burning of fossil fuels.
Ania clashes with friends who want swift action on the climate crisis and starts a blog in which she raises doubts about switching to renewable energy and frets as her community is plunged into destitution without coal. āRenewable energy sources donāt contribute much energy,ā the video states. āUnlike coal, energy from the wind or sun is unreliable, expensive and difficult to store.ā
The video concludes by raising the specter of Nazi Germany, with Aniaās grandfather praising her stand against people concerned about climate change by comparing it to the Warsaw uprising. āThrough her familyās stories, Ania is realizing that fighting oppression is risky and that it always takes courage,ā the voiceover states.
Other approved videos have similar themes, with one showing two children, Leo and Layla, being told by their scientist uncle, Will, about the supposed inadequacies of renewable energy. āWind and solar just arenāt powerful enough to power the modern world, the energy from them isnāt dense or robust enough,ā says Will, as a bird is shown falling dead from the sky after being hit by the blades of a wind turbine. āWindmills kill so many birds,ā Will adds, mournfully.
A further video extols the benefits of plastics ā which come from a byproduct of oil and gas production and are now found strewn in the air, the oceans, the mountains and even in the placentas of unborn babies ā as being superior to killing animals for their body parts, with Leo commenting he prefers having a plastic bicycle helmet to wearing a turtle shell on his head. Leo Baekeland, the Belgian chemist known for the invention of Bakelite, is shown in the video declaring that āfossil fuels are cheap and plentiful, thank goodness!ā
It didnāt quote the Redditor as an expert. That was an opinion section. The quoted expert in the article was the Kansas university researcher.
Itās objectively true that Prager is a christofascist that uses his platform to whitewash history including slavery and colonialism, and demonize any progressive beliefs. Itās propaganda.
If youāre trying to claim neutrality while complaining that a news article is being uncharitable to prageru, youāre either extremely uninformed or extremely disingenuous.
Sorry, Iām clearly doing a terrible job making my point.
So instead, I just did a quick search. If the person writing the article included this information I would never had said anything.
Hereās the animation produced by PragerU and enforced for the Florida schoolās curriculum:
https://www.prageru.com/video/poland-anias-energy-crisis
And hereās a more thorough article with facts and details, that does beyond calling a Reddit user and expert for a clickbait headline:
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2023/08/prageru-climate-skeptic-science-florida-education/
My issue was with the article, not the position. It wasnāt informing. It was pandering. After watching the video I am better informed about the counterpoint to my own beliefs.
And donāt listen to me, a random Lemmy user, but my take was that it was a terrible argument and I was offended by it. I worry that this is what is being promoted as material suitable for educational purposes.
Iām not sure why youāre being so heavily downvoted, youāre absolutely right. Neither the Yahoo article nor the Guardian article itās based on did the legwork to back up the premise. To drown out the misinformation, journalists need to bring the facts, else they leave the narrative open to bad faith criticism. I donāt see where youāve advocated for the morons in the least, just asked that journalistās do their jobs.
I think The Guardian is right not to share the actual bullshit. The article would just be another example of TMZ or Entertainment Tonight if they just flung the lies all over. I know where to find PāUā if I want to see it. I donāt think The Guardian needs to submit its readers to more crap in the article.
There is more info about the content of the videos in the Guardian article.
But no links, even though the Guardian article has a ton of links to tangential subjects mentioned in the article.
deleted by creator
Article sounds stupid, but so is complaining about āfanning the flames of divisionā in the context of writing criticism of a thinktank-made curriculum
A āthink tankā and Prager U should never be confused. There is no thinking going on at Prager U.
Stink tank
