The Value of Compulsory (Climate) Science?

                                  Sunset over fossil free state without CO2 polluting people and welfare.

Tim Ball asks for Compulsory Courses for Any Curriculum; The Science Dilemma:

• Science is pervasive directly and indirectly in every phase of modern life. 
• This knowledge must be a fundamental part of any school curriculum. 

Tim suggests that compulsory science could save people from a meaningless ban on fossil fuel: 

• Climate skeptics struggle with getting the majority of people to understand the problems with the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) anthropogenic global warming (AGW) story. The problem is much wider because it relates to the lack of scientific abilities among a majority of the population.

Tim is not happy with the present situation:

• I was involved in many curricula fights, few of them ever resolved much.
•  Ever subject area and discipline considered theirs essential to an education. They failed in achieving curricula useful to the student and society. 
• This was because they were controlled by people ensuring what interested them or what ensured their job, rather than what the student needed to become an effective informed citizen.
• Students are not given the tools to avoid being exploited. Indeed, sometimes I think the system keeps them ignorant so it can exploit them as adults. 
• Peoples of the Rainforest teach their children what they need to survive in the real and dangerous world in which they live.
• We don’t do this at any level. For most North American university or college students the experience is a socially acceptable and ridiculously expensive form of unemployment. Most of them learn more about life and themselves in part-time and summer jobs. 

I agree with Tim about the incitaments behind curricula, but I am not sure compulsory science would be beneficial. The trouble with anthropogenic global warming is that it is massively backed by scientists and academic institutions, and compulsory science could just mean more backing of fake science.

The real Science Dilemma is maybe rather to distinguish real science from fake science.

PS Our new social democratic Minister of Climate and Vice Prime Minister Isabella Lövin today proudly announces that

• Sweden will be the first fossil free welfare state in the Milky Way Galaxy.

Isabella Lövin of course has no climate science education, but would that have changed anything?