Body & Soul3 mins ago
Will Ukip Voters Casually Ignore Education Tampering?
37 Answers
UKIP announces plans to ban education about global warming in schools. Specifically, they want to stop screenings of Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth
http://
To a certain extent, I am not massively worried about such a ban: -
i) My education taught me the basics about weather systems and terrain-related climate factors. Also about the carbon cycle, the water cycle, the greenhouse effect (only in as far as explaining why the earth is not an iceball, given its distance from the sun). There was *nothing whatsoever* about global warming taught in those days.
ii) I have not actually watched the Al Gore film myself: I didn't really need to, as I'd seen plenty of evidence accumulating since the first glacier retreat stories, in the 80s.
So, the nub of my question is that here is another political party wanting the power to tell us what we can or cannot teach our kids: should we allow them to do this?
If you are contemplating voting UKIP, would this policy be a clincher or a dealbreaker?
http://
To a certain extent, I am not massively worried about such a ban: -
i) My education taught me the basics about weather systems and terrain-related climate factors. Also about the carbon cycle, the water cycle, the greenhouse effect (only in as far as explaining why the earth is not an iceball, given its distance from the sun). There was *nothing whatsoever* about global warming taught in those days.
ii) I have not actually watched the Al Gore film myself: I didn't really need to, as I'd seen plenty of evidence accumulating since the first glacier retreat stories, in the 80s.
So, the nub of my question is that here is another political party wanting the power to tell us what we can or cannot teach our kids: should we allow them to do this?
If you are contemplating voting UKIP, would this policy be a clincher or a dealbreaker?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Hypognosis. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Derek Clark, the UKiP MEP who has made this propoosal
// Derek Clark Former Schoolmaster and member of the Committee which combined the CSE/GCE into the present GCSE system, my interests, outside UKIP, extend to foreign travel - having visited every Western European country mostly by car, often with a caravan in tow. //
He must have a carbon footprint the size of a UKiP EU expenses claim.
// Derek Clark Former Schoolmaster and member of the Committee which combined the CSE/GCE into the present GCSE system, my interests, outside UKIP, extend to foreign travel - having visited every Western European country mostly by car, often with a caravan in tow. //
He must have a carbon footprint the size of a UKiP EU expenses claim.
Glad to hear it Baldric ! But why would anyone vote UKIP, when they have no chance whatsoever of being elected into Government...that is the question I would like somebody to answer.
With our first-past-the-post system for General Elections, parties like UKIP will never be a force to reckoned with. The only reason that they have a minority presence in Europe is because of PR. I think its about time I re-posted dave's view of UKIP, as it is some weeks since I last did it :::
http://
Whatever else I might think about dave and his Party of privilege, he got it right that time !
With our first-past-the-post system for General Elections, parties like UKIP will never be a force to reckoned with. The only reason that they have a minority presence in Europe is because of PR. I think its about time I re-posted dave's view of UKIP, as it is some weeks since I last did it :::
http://
Whatever else I might think about dave and his Party of privilege, he got it right that time !
@zacs
I know they have the power: I said they have the power. I asked 'should we allow them to have the power?
Acquiescing to the position of "we can't stop them" and saying my question is irrelevant because of that stance is evading the question.
No disagreement with the remainder of your post. ;-)
I know they have the power: I said they have the power. I asked 'should we allow them to have the power?
Acquiescing to the position of "we can't stop them" and saying my question is irrelevant because of that stance is evading the question.
No disagreement with the remainder of your post. ;-)
@mikey4444
//This is entirely academic, as UKIP has no chance whatsoever of forming a Government.//
True but we've been saying the same thing about the LibDamns for decades.
Look what happened!
What if Borgen-ian coalition politics became the status quo for a number of years?
I had literally no conception that the LibDems would get into bed with the Tories and I doubt anyone who made them their tactical vote thought that would happen either. I didn't vote for them, by the way but the overall outcome was a disappointment and a shock.
I dare say there will be a backlash against the LD (of little consequence). Of more consequence is that people will now have coalition outcomes in mind as they decide how to vote and aware they need to be careful of to whom they allot their 'protest vote'.
I'm not suggesting that UKIP would become the new coalition partner; as you said, Cam has driven the wedge in to keep them at bay. All the same deals can be made out of desperation to stay in power and obscure little policies like this one have potential to become the dealbreaker.
Meanwhile... you are all correct to state that the one-track-mind core UKIP voters will be so focussed on the EU exit goal that they will barely notice the sinister baggage being brought along for the ride.
It's supposed to be a one-issue party, after all, so why they bother with sideshows like this, I have no idea.
//This is entirely academic, as UKIP has no chance whatsoever of forming a Government.//
True but we've been saying the same thing about the LibDamns for decades.
Look what happened!
What if Borgen-ian coalition politics became the status quo for a number of years?
I had literally no conception that the LibDems would get into bed with the Tories and I doubt anyone who made them their tactical vote thought that would happen either. I didn't vote for them, by the way but the overall outcome was a disappointment and a shock.
I dare say there will be a backlash against the LD (of little consequence). Of more consequence is that people will now have coalition outcomes in mind as they decide how to vote and aware they need to be careful of to whom they allot their 'protest vote'.
I'm not suggesting that UKIP would become the new coalition partner; as you said, Cam has driven the wedge in to keep them at bay. All the same deals can be made out of desperation to stay in power and obscure little policies like this one have potential to become the dealbreaker.
Meanwhile... you are all correct to state that the one-track-mind core UKIP voters will be so focussed on the EU exit goal that they will barely notice the sinister baggage being brought along for the ride.
It's supposed to be a one-issue party, after all, so why they bother with sideshows like this, I have no idea.
I must admit that was my gut reaction to the headline, jno.
After a bit of thought, I decided that they do have a point (about 'indoctrination') and that they should be taught all the science about factors affecting climate - enough to get them to Uni, to study it in depth, at least. After that, they get to make up their own mind.
In an odd way, screening the film in schools may be serving the denier's side because most online debates quickly bring forth the jibe about Al Gore touring the world on the lecture circuit, by jet, with a massive carbon footprint and all the money he stands to make from carbon credit scheme etc. To a flexible-minded teenager, this could jar them into a belief that their teachers had been feeding them lies. Instant convert and another mouthpiece on the social networks, winning further converts.
Oops, wrong forum section. That should have gone into R&S ;-)
After a bit of thought, I decided that they do have a point (about 'indoctrination') and that they should be taught all the science about factors affecting climate - enough to get them to Uni, to study it in depth, at least. After that, they get to make up their own mind.
In an odd way, screening the film in schools may be serving the denier's side because most online debates quickly bring forth the jibe about Al Gore touring the world on the lecture circuit, by jet, with a massive carbon footprint and all the money he stands to make from carbon credit scheme etc. To a flexible-minded teenager, this could jar them into a belief that their teachers had been feeding them lies. Instant convert and another mouthpiece on the social networks, winning further converts.
Oops, wrong forum section. That should have gone into R&S ;-)
What I think it illustrates is thet UKIP's xenophobia is just one aspect of the party. It's part of a package of reactionary "let's turn the clock back to a time that never existed" ideals.
I'd imagine that for many potential UKIP voters who live in the same cloud-cuckoo-land it's probably a potential vote-winner. I'm not sure that such people exist in sufficient numbers in the real world for it to be of much significance.
I'd imagine that for many potential UKIP voters who live in the same cloud-cuckoo-land it's probably a potential vote-winner. I'm not sure that such people exist in sufficient numbers in the real world for it to be of much significance.
Your wish is my command Mikey :)
Have a read of this egregiously stupid piece of nonsense!
http://
Have a read of this egregiously stupid piece of nonsense!
http://
Latest Posts
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
Starmer And The Southpost Triple...
News9 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.