Schools

86% of Americans agree in two parent households

A Rasmussen Reports online survey “finds that 86% of American Adults still think it is at least somewhat important for children to grow up in a home with both of their parents, including 61% who think it’s Very Important. Just 10% say growing up in a two-parent home is not important, including only three percent (3%) who say it’s Not At All Important.”

CM is reminded of a NY Times hit piece on racial bias in schools which overlooked the high correlation of single parent households, truancy, matriculation and troubles at school.Referring to the number of kids living with both parents/step-parent (according to a 2015 Pew Research Center study) in America we found:

Asian: 82%

White: 71%

Hispanic: 55%

Black: 31%

The GAO stats make clear that Asian kids get caught up in the least amount of disciplinary action both by absolute and percentage wise. Blacks the most, Hispanics second and whites 3rd. Could it be an inverse correlation?

Psychological studies have shown boys seem to be more impacted by the lack of a father in the house than do girls. Children (especially boys) raised by single mothers are more likely to fare worse on a number of dimensions, including their school achievement, their social and emotional development, their health and their success in the labor market. They are at greater risk of parental abuse and neglect (especially from live-in boyfriends who are not their biological fathers), more likely to become teen parents and less likely to graduate from high school or college.

survey taken by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in the US back in January of 1993 revealed poverty, alcoholism, student apathy and absenteeism were cited as big problems in secondary public schools. Lack of a parent was high on the agenda.

The American Psychological Association, “poor (bottom 20 percent of all family incomes) students were five times more likely to drop out of high school than high-income (top 20 percent of all family incomes) students…Family poverty is associated with a number of adverse conditions — high mobility and homelessness; hunger and food insecurity; parents who are in jail or absent; domestic violence; drug abuse and other problems — known as “toxic stressors” because they are severe, sustained and not buffered by supportive relationships…Community poverty also matters. Some neighborhoods, particularly those with high concentrations of African-Americans, are communities of concentrated disadvantage with extremely high levels of joblessness, family instability, poor health, substance abuse, poverty, welfare dependency and crime

Broken homes and poverty are undoubtedly a big issue. The report said, “Besides lack of parent involvement, the school problems viewed as serious by at least 10 percent of public school teachers included student apathy, poverty, student absenteeism, student disrespect for teachers, parental alcoholism and/or drug abuse, and student tardiness. Behaviors and attitudes of students were more likely to be seen as problematic by teachers at the secondary level than by teachers at the elementary level. Parent alcoholism, on the other hand, was described as “serious” as often by elementary teachers as by secondary teachers and poverty was described as “serious” more often by elementary teachers.”

85% of kids likely to go to college or higher levels of education came from stable family backgrounds. 61% of kids likely to drop out before graduating high school are from broken homes. Sixty One Percent!

Of course socio-economic factors impact these statistics too.

CM has no moral high ground to talk from as a divorced parent but there is no question stable parenting helps. 86% of Americans might agree with the benefits of two parents.

Note that divorce rates in the US have fallen from 4.8 per thousand people in 1992 to 2.9 in 2016.

Marriage rates have declined in the US but there is a higher propensity among millennials to stay together meaning fewer marriages aren’t converting to fewer divorces.

Can we please get some adults in the room?

Here is a picture from the angelic pig-tailed climate strike goddess Greta Thunberg’s Twitter feed calling for another global school strike. The climate change activists are really at the point of maximum desperation. Kids are now being weaponized to fight climate change because the supposed adults in the room have done such a woeful prosecuting the case to the heretic non-believers.

It is hard to speak to those who dismiss one as a knuckle dragger from the start. What is lost on alarmists is that skeptics merely wish to be presented with facts and figures not sanctimonious finger wagging. In 99.9% of cases, when politely asking to be provided with facts, it ultimately leads to ad hominem attacks. “Your kids will thank you for it” is an argument often used as a condescending way to end a debate before it has even started. Others resort to saying skepticism comes from regrading quack websites resourced by the fossil fuel lobbyists, When CM asks alarmists about whether they have concerns over the multiple cases of fraud committed by scientists from the very (often government) bodies they spruik, not one has voiced issues with their ethics. At that point they have lost CM.

If alarmists can’t admit the fraud committed from their own side, it shows that they are utterly indoctrinated. 1+1=3. Fraud is fraud. CM has often argued that climate scientists face absolutely zero repercussions for peddling falsehoods. None. Think of the penalties handled out to the financial sector. There has been much malfeasance committed in the last few decades that have resulted in humungous penalties.

WorldCom CEO Bernie Ebbers was sentenced to 25 years based on nine counts of conspiracy, securities fraud and false regulatory filings to the tune of $11bn.

Enron’s former CEO Jeffrey Skilling was convicted on 35 counts of fraud, insider trading and other crimes related to Enron and sentenced to 24 years prison and fined $45 million.

Madoff got 150 years for his $65bn Ponzi scheme, Allen Stanford received 110 years jail for his $7bn fraud.

Yet when the scientific community commits fraudulent offences, they’re not even brought to trial. Nothing. Even worse the alarmists are only too happy to wheel out the very same scientists who have made dud predictions and push them as experts in their field.

How are billions in taxpayer funds that bail out Wall St any different from billions of taxpayer funded adventures into redundant climate change white elephants based of manipulated scientific claims any different?

CM reckons that if climate scientists faced steep fines and penalties for committing data fraud we would quickly work out we had way more than 12 years to live. Why not provide an amnesty period for scientists to come clean on any manipulation without facing any prosecution? After the date they would face stiff treatment. That is the only way to kill this industry at the source.

If scientists were forced to come clean with the truth, we would find that all of the grossly inaccurate models predicting gloom and doom were shown up for what they really were. Empty rhetoric.

Maybe the secret to solving the climate emergency is child’s play after all? Make the rules of malfeasance so transparent that even a 5 year old can understand.

If we look at the whistleblowing rules introduced by the SEC in 2011, it offered the whistleblower 10-30% of the monies saved through fraud as a reward. Surprise, surprise whistleblowing claims have shot up 16-fold since the rule’s introduction. In 2011 only 334 claims were made. In 2012, 3,001 were made. In 2014, 3,620. In 2018 it was 5,282. A total of $168mn was paid out to 13 individual whistleblowers.

Given so many scientists are probably aware of the manipulation that lies within the ranks, they have far more opportunity to dob in their crooked colleagues and collect a massive pay day.

No need for #ClimateEmergency. As the Australian Democrats used to say as an election slogan, “keep the bastards honest!”

Woke billionaire tweets a brainwashed teenager using profanity. Woke son of former PM retweets that

Wow. We are really being treated to quality campaigning. Atlassian co-founder & co-CEO Mike Cannon-Brookes (who incidentally went to the same high school as CM) eloquently tweeted his thoughts via the tweet of a pig-tailed brainwashed 16-yo foreigner who knows even less about Australia than climate science! Then former PM Malcolm Turnbull’s son, Alex, retweeted that. Woke!

No bias at the ABC?

CM can absolutely guarantee there is no bias at the national broadcaster, ABC. This ABC Kids program seals the verdict. Note the above link won’t allow it to be played on this website. The link in the previous sentence will.

Peter Ridd wins unfair dismissal action

Congratulations to Prof Peter Ridd, who has won his court case for unfair dismissal. Ridd, who was unceremoniously dumped by James Cook University for challenging the orthodoxy about the deterioration of the Great Barrier Reef, exposed the Marxism rife within our government funded universities.

The whole point of university is to encourage new thought and fresh ideas. Not sack those who disagree. So much for mounting a credible argument to debunk Ridd’s assertions. If anything he has proved the faculty couldn’t disprove him with facts.

He has won on all counts with respect to unfair dismissal. Will the Dean move to sack/sanction/demote those who encouraged the sacking?

Why the Greens will never be taken seriously

NSW Greens MLC Cate Faehrmann proves why her party can never be taken seriously to post this sort of potty humour surrounding the school climate strike.

Clearly she would be prime for the education portfolio with wit like that were the Greens ever to take office. Presumably profanity passes as creative writing in Cate’s world. Hopefully the kids used recycled cardboard and non-acrylic marker pens.

.

Scab?

Here is an article written by a Year 12 student, Joanne Tran, who didn’t want to be a truant and strike for climate change. She makes valid points.

In the old days workers who didn’t join the picket lines were called ‘scabs’. Good on her for standing up against the herd. No doubt the activists will scream an adult helped write that piece. Even if that turned out to be so, doesn’t that perfectly describe the argument of why kids shouldn’t be used as political pawns to promote one’s agenda? Unless it’s one’s own.