Climate indoctrination to continue in schools

Climate propaganda

Whereas the UK has abandoned [correction – “has recommended abandoning” (link)- Ed] teaching climate science in its curriculum, Australia will plough on, with our extremist (former Australian Conservation Foundation president) school education minister Peter Garrett confirming that the indoctrination with political propaganda will continue:

SCHOOL Education Minister Peter Garrett has confirmed the Gillard government will not stop the teaching of climate science in the classroom following a move in Britain for the subject to be withdrawn from the national curriculum.

Mr Garrett clarified last night that climate change was not taught as a curriculum subject in its own right in Australian schools, but could be adequately dealt with in science and geography classes.

“We have a cross-curriculum theme which is sustainability, and I think climate change would be an element of that,” he said on the ABC’s Q&A program.

Tom Oates, who will release the blueprint for a revised national syllabus for Britain later this year, has suggested teachers focus on core scientific principles instead of the impact of scientific processes on peoples’ lives. [Gee, what a novelty – a good idea for once – Ed]

Mr Oates, director of research at exams agency Cambridge Assessment, told The Guardian in Britain: “The national curriculum shouldn’t ever try to keep up with those, otherwise it would keep changing.”

However, Mr Garrett said it was unequivocal that there was a consensus of scientific opinion on the reality of climate change. “That is something that should be reflected in the ordinary course of a student’s education. If there are competing theories of one kind or another, they’re things that teachers can raise as well.” (source)

Very, very unlikely. In reality, it will be the force-feeding of impressionable young minds with politically skewed propagandist claptrap on climate, which has nothing to do with learning about impartial, free thinking scientific enquiry, but everything to do with programming a new generation of drones to unquestioningly believe whatever the government tells it. Tragic.



  1. I don’t have a problem with the teaching of climate science, as long as they include contrarian views so that children can decide for themselves. Far be it from an education system that teaches that humans evolved, and brand those who believe in Adam and Eve as “deniers”, or vice versa.

  2. Coincidentally, the Guardian has run a story about Climate Change in UK schools:

    • Thanks for that, and Bob Ward, ever the even-handed, fair-minded commentator, uses the opportunity to compare sceptic teachers to creationists. Because clearly the subtlety of the climate debate is perfectly analogous to the creation/evolution debate…

  3. It is illogical to subject children to a theory which is disputed in the scientific community so extensively. I think it is apt to liken the practise to a cult.

  4. It’s easy enough to de-program the child once they get home. But the problem with that is that you are then undermining the teachers. While this should result in a healthy skepticism for those in assumed authority, sometimes kids can’t quite grasp the nuances of this.

    We might all get fussed over this, but most of us would have received teaching in what was taken for conventional wisdom at the time, but has since been proven to be pure bunkum. I even remember schoolteachers making excuses for Labor government failings, and thinking that was odd even at a young age. The reality is that a bright young mind will find it’s own way.

    There are many great teachers out there. But the more ordinary ones I meet, the more I think that teaching as a profession is falling into the hands of the people who can’t grow up and be a real adult, the people who want to meddle and the flat out lazy who just want a union protected job with plenty of benefits.

  5. Interesting that this has come up as I had been thinking about the very same thing on the weekend.
    I saw a you tube video from the AYCC (Aust Youth for Climate Change) and it was filmed at the Copenhagen conference. They “interviewed” Monckton as a group (more like a pack of rabid attack dogs) and stuck propoganda stickers on his back to attempt to humiliate him. I was appalled as he attempting to answer the questions whilst AYCC members mouthed “bullshit” & put messages like “denier” behind him whilst he was speaking with them. They were very pleased with their efforts in trying to belittle Monckton, but of course no serious comment or scientific debate put to him.
    I then wondered how the AYCC members became this way, obviously they are the result of childhood indoctrination.
    Schools should be to prepare children for later life not for following crusades that the teachers feel are worthy.
    I also had noticed that Monckton has labelled some of these younger groups the “hitler youth”, and with apparent following of blind ideology by warmists, it doesnt appear too far off the mark.

    • I’m glad I am not the only one who had considered the Hitler Youth comparison. I think there is something fundamentally wrong with teaching children to feel quite guilty about using water, or anything, or how, if they don’t suffer in some way, then the world will be ruined. In my conversations with (other peoples, as i don’t have any of my own) children, I am always somewhat shocked by the brainwashing they seem to have received. 5 year olds talking about Carbon Footprints…or being told off for not having a hybrid car (when their parents drive a 4WD…). At 5yo, I very much doubt I was concerned with anything but cartoons on TV, and possibly star wars, dinosaurs and volcanos, and wanting to be a fireman, or a spaceman…

      I am all for teaching of environmental awareness, and concepts of conservation, but there are ways and means of doing so.

      It’s very odd, as they can be taught all about how evil CO2 is, but in a country founded on Christian values, they need permission to celebrate Easter, or Christmas at school, if the school even allows it at all, for fear of offending other religions.

      • You then have to wonder what will be next on the agenda if the warmists get their way. There will be some other crusade to make the children of western countries feel ashamed of living in the 1st world and having access to technology and energy etc. I know that my 9yo neice told my partner that she couldnt eat a certain food any longer as it contained palm oil and it destroys the habitat of the orangutang. I dont have an issue with wanting to save the habitat of endagered animals, but to push this stuff onto kids is just wrong. It should be the parents decision on what their children should and shouldnt hear with regards to social issues that effect them.

  6. Well, she is, after all, treating us like children…

  7. Thank heavens the school children aren’t old enough to vote.

  8. If people want to try something new for a change instead of the old Labor/Liberal Duopoly please consider the LDP.
    The LDP is for greater individual freedom ,less government intrusion into peoples lives, smaller government and lower taxes and is clearly against a carbon tax.
    It’s free to join online so I Hope people will give it a go instead of putting up with the usual duopoly there are actually more then 2 political parties in Australia you know.


  1. […] the national cirriculum. Meanwhile in Australia, they intend to continue subjecting children to Al Gore’s propaganda. The education minister and former head of the Australian Conservation Foundation, Peter Garrett […]

%d bloggers like this: