Home  >  Nebraska  >  Exclusive: Global Warming Book Ignites School Dispute Involving Congressman’s Family

Exclusive: Global Warming Book Ignites School Dispute Involving Congressman’s Family

By   /   May 14, 2010  /   News  /   40 Comments

A controversial book and video on global warming has lit a fire in Nebraska’s 3rd largest school district. The dispute involves one of the state’s highest ranking federal officials and his 12-year-old son. 

Nebraska Watchdog has learned that Millard Public Schools (MPS) is the target of complaints and concern from parents, including Congressman Lee Terry (NE-R) and his wife Robyn, regarding the book “The Down-to-Earth Guide to Global Warming.” In a statement sent exclusively to Nebraska Watchdog, Mrs. Terry writes that global warming is “highly debatable as to whether it is fact, theory or down right fiction.”

According to Millard spokesperson Amy Friedman the district “has received 3 requests to remove the book…and a video on Global Warming hosted by Leonardo DiCaprio.”  One of the book’s authors is Laurie David, the producer of the Academy Award winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth, a film based on former Vice President Al Gore’s research regarding the politically charged subject.

On her Facebook page Robyn Terry, who did not file a formal complaint, writes, “The book is a deplorable piece of propaganda aimed at children…” The Terry’s son is a student at Beadle Middle School.

Friedman tells Nebraska Watchdog that all Millard middle schools have the book and film but she indicates in a statement that their use is not mandatory. According to Friedman, “These resources are two of many from which middle school teachers and students can choose to use during reading class.”

But according to Robyn Terry “…children do not have a choice as to whether they want to read this book or a different one.”

Another Millard parent, Matt Butler, also finds the school district’s explanation lacking. Butler says he is “shocked at the level of blatant political manipulation being put on one of my kids.” Butler, who contends that global warming is “junk science”, points to a page in the book where the reader is urged to “Become a Global Warming Activist” and another page which states, “We can vote for leaders who care about your health, air, and environment.”

Because MPS has received formal complaints Friedman says the district’s review policy is already kicking in. According to Friedman a committee at the middle school level, comprised of parents, teachers and administrators will thoroughly examine the book and video. Friedman says the review will take at least 30 days and when it’s completed those who filed complaints will be notified of the committee’s decision.

Congressman Terry’s wife says her son is no longer reading the book because she signed a form removing it from his non-fiction lesson plan. She wonders how many parents (in a district where most of the registered voters are conservative Republicans) know about the book.

Robyn Terry tells Nebraska Watchdog that “Lee and I have discussed this at great length” and they want the book removed from the classroom and placed in the library where it can be checked out and read at home with the parents supervision. Mrs. Terry adds the school district should, “NEVER show this video to students again.”

Editor’s note: to subscribe free of charge to News Updates from Nebraska Watchdog click here

Editor’s note: click here to see the DiCaprio video

Reported by Joe Jordan, joe@nebraskawatchdog.org


Joe formerly served as staff reporter for Watchdog.org.

  • Susan Sitzmann

    It’s too bad that people, such as Congressman and Mrs. Terry and Matt Butler don’t choose to further educate themselves about such matters before coming out and making ignorant, emotive-based statements. In fact, it’s extremely unfortunate that they didn’t attend the just concluded first Summer Institute on Climate Change at UNL where scientists offered both pro and con information based in facts, allowing all institute participants to formulate their own final summations. I attended as a private citizen and now have far more information and insight than the majority who base their “knowledge” on opinions and conjecture, such as the above mentioned people. I would highly recommend that all people seek a balance of information on any “hot-button” issues before making their views know, regardless of the venue–school, media, etc.

  • jeff Kirkpatrick

    So Robyn Terry’s position is that children should not be encouraged to vote for leaders who care about our health, air, and environment. I must say that is a impressive level of honesty.

  • dd

    WOW, as a MPS parent I am appalled at Mrs. Terry’s simpleness. I have to ask her why she is so frightened at the idea that her child might have to think for himself. I also wonder if she has ever studied any of the sciences. I have, and so I can see that this fear-based stance has obviously left her vulnerable to the scoundrels that prey on our people for their own financial advancement instead of truth. As the wife of a congressman I would assume that she would be savvy enough to understand who is paying for the advancement of the “Junk Science” that she is touting as truth, guess not. I consider this effort to quiet and hide from what frightens you as dysfunctional, however, I consider attempts to control others from exploring difficult studies as unpatriotic. Also, who told her that most of the registered voters in our district are “conservative ” republicans? The inference is that the schools had better pay attention to the prevailing political wind and subject our children to its mythology, and the hell with ACTUAL science. One more example, to me, we will do much better when we learn to listen to scholars, not salesmen.

  • scott

    I don’t understand how Lee Terry (a congressman!) can waffle on global warming. Is he a scientist? Something is happening to our planet’s atmosphere. We can differ on what exactly is causing the changes, but only an ostrich can deny that something is happening. Shutting down one facet of the debate is reprehensible, and parents and teachers can and should discuss the idea of examining a wide range of beliefs. One aspect mentioned her that is very important is the democratic credo of voting for people that believe what you believe. What’s wrong with that? That is what democracy is all about, be you a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian or any other party.

  • Scott Petersen

    Thanks to Joe Jordan for covering this. It’s unbelievable that this liberal propaganda makes it into our schools. It’s also entertaining to watch the “sky is falling” global warming crowd call people “ignorant” or “simple” for not blindly accepting the theory. And, yes, it is just a theory.

  • Theodore Anderson

    I am a scientist and I have studied meteorology and climate and man-made global warming is debatable despite what Al Gore says. It is understandable that kids need to be taught about climate change and the possible effects of a warming world. A textook needs to have the facts and in no way should advocate activism or who they should vote for. After reading some of the comments it is perhaps you who should see both sides of the issue because there is tremendous evidence that the Earth’s climate changes naturally. Much of the data that hardcore global warmers publish is cherry picked and exaggerated. Many temperature sensors around the world have been placed by buildings and or pavement, which of course will show a warming bias. Weather stations that were on the outskirts of town 40 years ago now are surrounded by cities. There are many more examples that you should research yourself. Don’t take Al Gore’s word for it or other scientists that are more political than scientific. They exaggerate it because they have a political agenda and some of the scientists get well paid by groups who push the agenda. So the the person who wrote a comment about kids need to think for themselves..how can they think for themselves when they are only given one side of the debate.

  • Bob Boyce

    Replying to Scott Petersen–you say that global warming is “just a theory.” Have you yourself actually looked at the worldwide figures on the numbers of record high temperatures recently? Do you know that of some 150 glaciers in Glacier National Park in 1850, only 37 remain?

  • Matt Butler

    For the record: I have actually READ the book. Criticism directed towards me from people who have read the book is welcome. If you have not read the book, I would humbly ask you to do so BEFORE blasting away. Thank you.

  • John

    School is supposed to be a place of learning, not a conduit for Leftist propaganda.

    This is not something conducive to learning any more than a video propounding the aspects of Nazism, Communism, or radical Islam.

  • gene

    Bob – do you know the entire continent was covered with Ice at one time. Are we to blame for that too. I haven’t seen any record highs in Nebraska for years. Maybe a few recored lows.

  • gene

    Susan – how do you know that the Terry’s have not educated themselves on this issue. Good for you to attend seminars containing both sides. Maybe they have attended such seminars. Looks to me like Matt has read the book. Typical lib talk to call some one ignorant, cause they don’t agree with you.

  • gene

    Dd, looks like the pro-GW crowd is doing the fear-based approach. Typical of libs to call some one a scoundral for disagreeing with them. I’m sure the Terry’s are smart enough to know that both sides are being politically funded. Junk science is when Al Gore uses fake photos of polar bares in his move a claims them to true. Hollywood is paying for this Junk science.

    I am also sure that Ms. Terry is as much of a scientist as Al Gore. Looks like Al and Leo are the salesmen here not the scholars, but you blindly follow what they have to say. The entire district 2 in Douglas county has more Republican registered voters, so I’m pretty sure Millared is higher than the rest of the district.

  • UNL Grad

    Mrs. Terry is absolutely right on this issue. The only researchers I know who agree on manmade climate change are those who are receiving federal research funding or funds from climate change activists. It is unacceptable and an indication of a serious ethical lapse in the research community.

  • http://jg05452@windstream.net Jim

    For the sake of his children he had better hope global warming is fiction! There will be no second chances if he is wrong…but he is only concerned about the next vote!

  • Susan Sitzmann

    I am both amazed and amused that people wouldn’t want to do everything in their power to preserve and protect the environment for future generations to come…regardless of the argument about whether global warming is real, manmade; regardless of political beliefs, etc. BTW, what makes preserving and protecting our environment a “leftist” or “liberal” issue?!? Isn’t is a “humanist” issue in which each and every one of us has a stake? People in the US collectively have developed what I view as an extremely arrogant attitude where the use of our world’s natural resources are concerned, and you don’t have to go far to see how out of balance US consumption of goods and services are compared with other countries around the globe, particularly considering how young our country is in comparison to others. So where in the world does it say that we as a nation have unlimited rights to use/waste as much of the world’s resources as we want?! We are but one global citizen of this world and it would do well for us to remember this and look out for our neighbors, be they next door or far flung across the world.

  • Lee Terry must go!

    If Al Gore said the sky is blue, all you stupid Republicants would say it it purple. How utterly pathetic to be so wrapped up in the welfare of giant corporations that you would sacrifice the only planet we have to save them a few bucks. God forbid they have to clean up their acts….global warming or not. I wish all of you could find another planet to live because you’re really screwing up Earth for the rest of us!

  • Susan Sitzmann

    Gene, how do you know that the Terry’s HAVE educated themselves on the issue beyond protesting the use of a book and video as a teaching instrument? These are the exact same “arguments” that had led to the banishment of acclaimed literary works in school libraries. We as a society seem to be very afraid of allowing our offspring to learn how to make their own informed decisions. As parents, we could do much more in helping our children balance out issues for themselves as opposed to making decisions for them–end of discussion!!! Honestly, what is it that people are so afraid of, any way?

  • Mike Y

    I think a short list of recent articles on the subject more than justifies the Terry’s position.

    Quoted from Ed Morrissey:

    • University of East Anglia e-mails that exposed data destruction, attempts to hide contradictory data, and conspiracies to sabotage the work of skeptical scientists

    • The East Anglia CRU threw out their raw data, undermining any effort to check their work

    • NOAA/GHCN “homogenization” falsified climate declines into increases

    • East Anglia CRU’s below-standard computer modeling

    • No rise in atmospheric carbon fraction over the last 150 years: University of Bristol

    • IPCC withdraws claim that AGW will wipe out Himalayan glaciers by 2035

    • IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri knew Himalayan claim was bogus for months before exposure

    • Amazonian rainforest conclusions not based on scientific research but on advocacy group claims

    • Mountain glacier claims based on unsubstantiated student theses and anecdotes from climber magazine

    • Search of IPCC report footnotes exposes ten more student dissertations presented as peer-reviewed research

    • Medieval Warming Period temperatures may have been global, undermining entire AGW case

    • Measurements used for AGW case were influenced by urbanization, poor location, bad data sets

    • African-crop claims exposed as false

    • IPCC researchers excluded Southern Hemisphere data to exaggerate effects of warming on hurricanes

    • Hurricane claims further exposed as false by actual peer-reviewed research — including by some AGW researchers

    • Major scientific group concludes IPCC-linked researchers “complicit in the alleged scientific malpractices“

  • Marjie

    For those who never have heard of the Chicago Climate Exchange….The Chicago Climate Exchange needs to be investigated. They are selling futures on cap and trade legislation. Al Gore and Goldman Sachs all have investments in this. Al Gore is the founder and serves on the board of the London based Generation Investment Company which happens to be the fifth largest owner in this scheme. Goldman Sachs owns 10% of GIC. The Joyce Foundation and Tides Foundation (George Soros) are also involved. Who else is invested? Obama? Graham? Lieberman? Kerry? Sunstein? In fact Obama was a shadow board member for the Tides Foundation. Hmmmm. The Tides Foundation takes in donations and in turn makes donation to various organizations in a way that they cannot be tied directly to the original donor. They gave the funds to start the exchange. The technology to trade carbon credits was bought from the wife of the inventor by Franklin Raines. Franklin Raines worked for Fannie Mae when everything was falling apart. Then there is Scott Lesmes, also from Fannie Mae, who was responsible for bundling the bad housing loans. His name is on the patent for the system and method for residential emissions trading bought by Franklin Raines.

    These people benefited from that crisis and now they are working on the next. This is all being done at the expense of the American people. Haven’t we paid enough? Retirement savings zapped, bailouts, unemployment, loss of property value, government spending out of control, rising prices, skyrocketing debt and devaluing of the dollar. Have I missed anything? Is there anything else we can gamble on? Now Climate change? WOW! Tax the energy companies and pass it onto the American public. This is stealing. How much more can you ignore it? On top of all this there is NO global warming. We have been cooling! The false scientific reports have been exposed (5). Climate change has been going on since the beginning of time. It’s obvious who is going to benefit from this outrageous legislation.

    Instead of assuming a young child can think for themselves, why don’t you do the same? Go do your own research. Even if you stopped all industry and “carbon” activity there would be very little impact. Even the “environmentalists” have been caught on tape stating this very fact.

  • Valerie

    In the 70’s OPS was teaching global cooling. The ice was growing and no food will grow. However the libs want to stir up a crisises to take away liberties and money. They have to work it to fit their agenda. Some people refuse to fall for their tactics. Why don’t they try to stop the Eruptions of volcanos. People learn from history. This progressive movement.has been infiltating our country and we have been sleeping. Wake up and educate yourself and your neighbor if you can. I believe in being good stewerts of the earth but what this is about distibution of wealth. Exchange in the currupt city of Chicago. Don’t see anything good for the environment but it will raise our cost of living in almost every aspect

  • KearneyMom

    The majority of commenters here are steeped in partisan politics, but utterly ignorant of the scientific evidence – and have bought into the well-documented billion-dollar disinformation campaign to discredit climate science. All of the denier arguments here have been debunked and discredited repeatedly, but like zombies they rise again.

    See SkepticalScience.com for a full explanation of ALL the scientific evidence, covering both what is known so far and what is not, along with all of the pro and con arguments. Unlike denier sites, the entire spectrum of scientific evidence is examined, with sourced academic studies that you can read yourself. If you are unaware of the documented fact that every major scientific organization in the ENTIRE WORLD has declared human activities are exerting unprecedented, rapid change on our climate and Earth systems processes, then you haven’t been getting the full story.

    But only check out SkepticalScience.com if actual scientific evidence gathered from actual field data is more important to you than your petty partisan political hobby horses. See if you have the guts to show the full spectrum of actual scientific evidence to your kids and grandkids so they can decide for themselves — since they are the ones who will have to live with the consequences of your choices.

  • jazzee

    Marjie!! Great information for those who refuse to have an ‘open’ mind.

  • Sarpy Dad

    Its surprising that the issue of a family’s control over their kids’ reading material devolved into a political free-for-all (or is it??)

    If a family objects to the content presented by ANYONE to their kids, they have the right to object, and remove their kids.

    I find it refreshing to see a young couple closely involved in their kids’ lives. Isn’t that what we’re holding as the problem in other parts of the city??

    Congrats to Lee and Robyn on caring for their kids.

  • Dave

    Greetings fellow Millard school parents…I have 2 kids at Grace Abbott and 1 at Peter Kewitt.

    Very interesting comments on this story, and thus feel compelled to opine. I’ve been a meteorologist with the National Weather Service for 16 years now, 7 of them here at the Omaha/Valley office.

    The debate is over? I think not. It’s tragic that this subject has evolved to a political hot potato with proponents of global warming insisting doom…with ZERO understanding of our complex environment.

    So let’s start with what we do know. Yes, climate records over the last 100 years do indeed show a warming trend has taken place. HOWEVER…the question is; was it caused by human activity or cyclical?? The bottom line folks…there is nothing conclusive from any atmospheric research available to point the finger at humans as the definite cause.

    As a matter of fact, information provided from the National Climatic Data Center( http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html) has show a cooling trend over the Contiguous United States since 1998. Specifically, the annual temperature average between 1901 – 2009 = 52.89 degF. Meanwhile…the annual 1998 – 2009 trend has shown a -1.04 degF drop during that decade. (http://climvis.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/cag3/hr-display3.pl)

    Why is this cooling trend occurring?…WE DON’T KNOW!! We’re not that good. We have a hard enough time with a 7 day forecast let alone trying to forecast hundreds of years from now. Computer models are very, very complex and I assure you that not every element is know to create flawless model equations.

    Besides, global warming must not be too much of a concern for Al Gore given he just purchased a $9 million mansion in Montecito, California.

    Bottom line…I’ll start worrying about global warming when the politicians espousing gloom and doom set the example and walk-the-walk(i.e…part with THEIR large homes/SUVs/private jet).

    If you feel I’m in error, please specify in what aspect(not rhetoric). I’d be happy to dialog with you.

  • Dave

    Kearney Mom, you have no idea what you’re talking about. You claim your website provides pro/con information, then reference it as proof of global warming?!?! I’d bet a weeks pay check you don’t understand one thing provided on it.

  • KearneyMom

    First off, “Dave”, I would caution you to not write checks your a** can’t cash. You no know nothing about me or my background in science.

    If you really do work for NWS, hopefully you’re not representative of the commitment to scientific rigor there. The “ten years of global cooling” canard was debunked last year, didn’t you know? Surely you’re aware that NASA, NOAA and your colleagues at the Met Office concluded the last decade was the hottest in the instrument record. Surely you’re aware that the contiguous United States is not the whole world, and not representative of global temperature trends. Oddly, you seem to think that the limitations in your field apply to the climate sciences in equal measure. So what’s your explanation for accelerating ocean acidification?

    You should also read more carefully: I did not say SkepticalScience.com or the information contained therein was “proof of global warming”, or that the “debate is settled”. It is a good, comprehensive site that explains — with sourced, peer-reviewed studies — the current state of the scientific evidence in a way that is accessible & readable to the average non-scientist. It is not *my* website; I don’t own it or contribute to it in any way. I did not predict “doom and gloom”, just reminded people that they should focus on the science and not the politics, because their children will live with the consequences. One might think, if you were truly interested in honest discourse that helps educate rather than obfuscate, you would encourage people to seek out unbiased, apolitical sources. Instead, you tossed out some political chum about non-scientist Al Gore. That does not constitute scientific data or evidence.

    The commenters here seem to be conflating the political/policy arguments rather than seeking to examine and understand the data. Sad.

  • GopGal

    And one might think that if you were truly interested in what you say that you would insist that public schools not use books and videos created by politically focused people.

  • EcoBob

    As an ecologist, I find it quite interesting that people choose to side with a political agenda or politician instead of looking at the information themselves as it is intended. Anyone can take any information and misquote it (yes, from either side) but don’t hide your heads in the sand because you don’t want to deal with it. Despite all efforts, ignorance is not bliss. Openly discuss the issue/theory; I believe that was the intent of the book and video. I believe that Global Warming is a natural process BUT human induced activities have accelerated the process before adaptation can occur. Remember we need the earth the earth doesn’t need us. How far can we ‘push it’ before it severely effects us is difficult to predict. Conservation is the answer (Use, don’t abuse or we lose). Maybe the book introduces theories on Global warming, maybe some are right and some are not so right. That is ok as long as there are productive discussions and further research. That is how the process of theories works. Yes, Mr. Scott Peterson it is just a theory but need I remind you – The ‘Law of Gravity’ is really only a theory too. I hate to admit that in one aspect “Sarpy Dad” is correct in that Mr. & Mrs. Terry have every right to shield THEIR kids from thoughts and theories in the world BUT what I’m asking is that you don’t narrow my kids’ options by removing it for all kids in school. As an involved parent, I look forward for when my child reads the book and/or sees the video so that we can have a good discussion.

    I want to thank you Mr. Jordan for bringing this topic to light for discussion. I have followed your career for years and you have never been better!

  • Dave

    Kearney Mom…very feisty post. I like feisty!

    If I may, I’d like to go bit-by-bit to answer your post.

    -I truly am a meteorologist with the NWS. As a matter of fact, I was stationed at the Hastings office for several years before returning to Omaha(my hometown). I’d have given you a tour of the office.

    -the 10 year cooling trend is fact. I provided a link showing an average temp decrease of 1 deg during the period between 1998-2009. Did you not look at it? That information is for public use provided by NOAA. I should have elaborated on that a bit more though. Yes…that decade so far is the warmest on record with a peak in the late 90s. What I was referring to was the downward trend since then. this is an undisputed fact. NOAA has never denied this. Sorry for any confusion on my part. (fyi…the NWS falls under NOAA which falls under the DOC)

    -I wasn’t trying to imply that U.S. trends represented global trends. However, I think it is a reasonable question. Why is the trend cooler for the U.S…but not globally? Aren’t you interested in knowing too?

    -The limitations for climate forecasting are infinity worse that short term forecasting. All forecast models have an initialization based on an assumption of the atmosphere(i.e..getting as much known info as possible into the equations), then algorithms can be run as far out as needed. The problem is if the initialization is off, then the forecasts will likely be off.

    -Ocean acid?…Ocean acid? I didn’t even know there was acid in the oceans(little joke there to lighten things up). Subject though is beyond me.

    -I only mentioned “debate is settled” because that’s what Gore said. How about you? Do you think the debate is settled?

    -Obfuscate?…Conflating? Stop that. It took me forever to find in Webster.

    At any rate, you sound like a sincere parent with concerns for future generations…and I can appreciated that. But I assure you that I don’t peruse political blogs to get climate info. I can go right to the source.

    What bothers me the most though is politicians(Republicans AND Democrats) who are gung-ho to ram Cap-and-Trade down our throats, but continue to live a life of excess(gas hog vehicles/large homes..etc). Doesn’t that make you angry too? Truth be told, both parties make me upchuck. If I missed a question please let me know.

    My sincere regards…Dave

    BTW…what field are you in?

  • Dave


    I should have mentioned earlier…these are my own opinions(i.e..I’m not speaking for NOAA/NWS)

  • GopGal

    I think Bob should check the book out from the library and view the video. From his comment, it doesn’t sound like he has done either.

  • EcoBob

    I contacted the Administration office and the book is not required reading it is one of many books that the children can select which should remove some stress from the parents that don’t want their kids to read the book as they can just tell their child ‘don’t pick that book’.

    FYI – you can like some of what a book states and not others. Just because the book might tell you how to become a “Global Warming Activist” and you don’t agree, this is America, you don’t have to become an activist.

    As I read the above article again, I find it interesting of Mr. Butler that he is ‘offended’ by the ‘blatant political manipulation’ and yet isn’t that what he is doing but in the opposite approach so should we not be offended by him? His beliefs are just that and I respect that those are his beliefs but don’t criticize a group by using similar forms of manipulation. And don’t we all vote for leaders who speak out about issues we are in favor?

  • Robyn

    That may be the company line, but that is not the way it played out in my child’s school.

    I could choose an alternate book for my son, but he was not given a choice. The letter sent to me was signed “The Sixth Grade Reading Team” and the only book listed in the letter was the David book.

    As I have said, the principal arranged for my son to use a different book, in a different classroom. We chose a different book in a conference room setting to avoid the students in the other classrooms that were not using the book from becoming a part of the debate.

    All students will be preparing a powerpoint presentation based on a concept from the book they were assigned to read.

    As I have stated repeatedly, the subject of this book was a poor choice for a lesson in Reading. The video was an excellent choice for a lesson in political propaganda in the classroom (sarcasm intended).

  • CR

    It is unfortunate the child was not given a choice. Politics are unbearably ugly for adults, why bring a child into the debate unnecessarily. The teacher should have been mindfully proactive and offered additional resources to the entire classroom.

  • EcoBob

    I was recently told that it’s only in the 6th grade curriculum so I asked my child about the book. When in 6th grade they were not required to read it in fact they knew nothing about the book. Granted this might have been something that just started this year which could explain that why they were not aware of the book.

    Even though I have indicated I have not read the book yet, I would disagree that it is a poor choice for a lesson in Reading (Your write up indicates you read it prior to your child being required that was how you knew you didn’t want your child to read it). If the kids are allowed to prepare a presentation on the concepts it would be a great opportunity for you and your child to discuss and if your child disagreed with the point(s) in the book the presentation would be a GREAT opportunity to share those views with the class. Again, offers a great opportunity for discussion and possible further research.

    I can only assume that based on what you (Robyn) wrote you are Mrs. Terry. I find it again interesting that a politician’s wife would be sarcastic about political propaganda. I do appreciate the opportunity to share ideas with others. Thank you.

  • Robyn

    I read what I was permitted to read online, which was about 6 pages on the Amazon website. The only way the book came home was in an envelope with me.

    It is new to the District this year, my older son did not read it until it came home in the envelope and he laughed at how ridiculous some of the claims in the book were, but he is a teenager and laughs at most things any adult claims.

    While you may find my position as a parent interesting. I find it interesting that you take no position on the purpose of the video in a Reading Unit on text features. I have stated multiple times that there is no purpose in showing this video to school kids, other than the obvious, unstated purpose (although, I do not believe its narrator leaves much unstated).

    I appreciate the District permitting its families to object to content that they feel is inappropriate for their children and I am thankful that there was an alternate text that my son could read and share with his teacher. I have yet to “see” the new book (it is being shared by a few people). I have read about the book online and asked my son what the book is about and if he thinks it is interesting or weird. He is fine with it and that makes me fine with it.

    Please feel free to share books with your children as you see fit and let me know if you object to a book that is being used to educate your children. I will be happy to look up the telephone number for your Principal and you can discuss it with him or her.

    And yes, politics is ugly enough without dumping it in the laps of 12 year olds during reading class.

    Mistakes happen and I can only hope that any lessons learned by this experience will be reflected upon by all. In the meantime, my sons only have one set of parents, it is on us to do the best we can to guide and protect them until they are able to do it on their own.

  • Pingback: Terry’s Critics Try to Heat Up “Global Warming” Fight

  • C

    Well..I’m an adult, and I laugh at adults every single day 🙂 Thanks, Robyn, for sharing your side of the story

  • Pingback: Exclusive: Congressman and Mrs. Terry Take Global Warming to School

  • http://www.greenpoweredhome.net Build Solar Panels

    I have been looking for this for some time. I am writing a college report on this and this is going to help me. Thanks.