Apostle Islands National Lakeshore will be participating in the 2013 Parks Climate Challenge program using national parks as classrooms to educate students about climate change, thanks to funding provided by the National Park Foundation.
The ability to learn about this important issue through a hands-on, science-based field curriculum, has proven a positive model through which to reach students.
The Apostle Islands National Lakeshore’s Changing Climate, Changing Culture teacher institute is scheduled for July 15-18. This professional development program is based at the Northern Great Lakes Visitor Center in Ashland, Wisconsin, with field experiences in the Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest; Apostle Islands, and neighboring tribal communities. Program information and registration materials are posted at this site.
The Changing Climate-Changing Culture Institute provides what’s missing in most climate change training and teaching -- the integration of climate change science with place-based evidence of how it is affecting both the environment and people. Participants discover how climate change is affecting cultural traditions of the Lake Superior Ojibwe people through Native perspectives. They will learn how to apply the latest climate research, from sources like the Wisconsin Initiative on Climate Change Impacts, to determine if culture and science agree that climate change is affecting all people and cultures.
“This Institute provides teachers with the training and tools to create hands-on service projects and dynamic lessons for their students to address climate change while incorporating a national park experience either within or outside the boundaries of a national park," said Neil Howk, assistant chief of interpretation and education at the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore.
Teachers will also lead their students on field trips to parks they are studying to deepen their understanding of climate change and their connection to the national parks. Service learning projects and lesson plans developed by the Institute participants are shared through the Parks Climate Challenge website so teachers everywhere can replicate the learning strategies.
Besides outstanding experiential professional development from nationally recognized instructors, teachers can receive a $400 stipend, credit, and transportation funds to bring their class to a national park for climate change field experiences. Applications to participate in the institute are due June 21st.
For more information about the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore “Changing Climate, Changing Culture” Teacher Institute contact Cathy Techtmann, UW-Extension Environmental Outreach State Specialist at 715.561.2695 or visit this site.
Comments
Quote:
"Do you know where that "97%" in "97% of scientists agree comes from? A graduate student sent out surveys to a selected 10000 "scientitsts" - mostly in the US. Some 300 responses were returned - many citing the poor structure of the survey. The student then hand selected 77 of those responses - after reveiwing them - and based his 97% on that sampling."
Please supply the source of this information. I'd be very interested in reading it.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/12/30/lawrence-solomon-75-clima...
One of many.
Well, EC, the document you cited comes from a man who is the author of "The Deniers," which would seem to be a red flag right off the bat. Beyond that, a study in 2004, five years before the one he relies on, concluded that "In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter" agreed on the human influence on climate change.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full
The last link I provided cites nearly 200 organizations outside the U.S. alone, so I'm guessing the number of scientists who believe in the anthropogenic influences on climate change are more than 75.
As for 97 percent, well, where that number grew from is indeed curious, though I would not agree with Mr. Solomon's contention.
Now, now everybody. One of the world's foremost self proclaimed experts on everything has just told us that climate change is bunk.
Who are we to question him and his infinite wisdom?
He quoted Lawrence Solomon and we we discover "Lawrence Solomon is a Canadian writer on the environment and the founder and executive director of Energy Probe, a Canadian non-governmental environmental policy organization and fossil fuel lobbyist group."
In fact, one of the scientists Solomon portrayed in The Deniers as one in opposition to man caused climate change had some of his thoughts quoted in a book review:
"Dr Nigel Weiss responded immediately and did not mince his words “The article by Lawrence Solomon, which portrays me as a denier of global warming, is a slanderous fabrication. I have always maintained that the current episode of warming that we are experiencing is caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gases, and that global temperatures will rise much further unless steps are taken to halt the burning of fossil fuel”. Unusually the rebuttle was accompanied by an official press release from the University of Cambridge."
Hmmmm. Solomon sounds like a person we can really trust, eh? Fortunately, there are many of us out here who aren't gullible enough to swallow his line and hook. For those who do . . . . there's probably not much anyone can say to change their minds because facts are so doggoned inconvenient to a locked mind.
Kurt - As I said, one of many. Rather than attacking the source, why don't you provide evidence that disputes any of the points?
Were the scientists polled not a selected list excluding fields that would have been relevant?
Were responses that were counted just 77 hand selected responses?
Were the questions not ambiguous?
All those facts are absolutely true, no matter who is reporting them.
Read the study. Taking the hand selected responses of 77 individuals and extrapolating that to 97% of all scientists is pure BS. But, its serves the AGW purposes so facts don't really matter. Just remember to keep repeating it - especially through the public school system were minds that don't know better can be melded.
And best yet Kurt (and Lee), please explain if CO2 causes global warming, why have temperatures not risen over the last 16 years despite record levels of CO2 output?
No doubt, there are differing opinions about CC and AGW. All those opinions should be presented in our educational system because the science isn't settled.
In the outstanding program presented by ranger Kevin Poe at Bryce Canyon, there are arguments both for and against. He carefully explains that the science is not settled and then lays out a wide variety of options to be explored. It is an extremely well balanced presentation designed to simply make people who have opinions on both sides of the issue do some real thinking. I found many surprises in the presentation and had to change my mind on some of the issues.
I'd be very, very surprised if the program in Apostle Islands is not very similarly constructed. Without seeing it, none of us can make that judgement.
In any case, a person who is truly well educated and accustomed to doing some real thinking, will examine all arguments carefully before making any judgements. It's extremely foolish to clamp tightly to one side of an issue and refuse to examine any others.
Your source is an article from 2010 looking at one particular survey. Since 2010 there have been numerous surveys, all with the same conclusion. The 97% number doesn't solely come from there.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.abstract
"Expert Credibility in Climate Change" from the National Academy of Sciences
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-adva...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013...
There are dozens of other articles and briefs but I am not going to waste anyone's time. The climate is changing. That is undeniable. One can choose to believe whether or not man is adding to the rate of change but one cannot choose to believe whether or not the earth is getting warmer. If changing human habits will slow the rate of change and lessen the likeliness of catastrophic events, it seems stupid not to attempt to do so.