Global warming for kids: A simple explanation of climate change

It is mighty difficult to explain something well to a child, and as with any communication it depends on both sides in terms of their capabilities (bandwidth and latency by analogy). However, more importantly there is metaphysical question as to why the communication should happen, and what the end result should be. That is something Im missing in sites aiming at reaching an audience as young as elementary schools.

The introductory end sentence is full of speculative extremes selected from stories put together by people having all kinds of stake in that message (for political or professional prestige reasons). One is free to do it this way to induce fear and paralysis, but it is not motivating in my view.

Personally, Im very much against putting up a fictional/speculative proverbial "Goliath" with which kids cannot possibly aspire to understand or compete. The induced response is "consumerism", a special kind of (the green one), blind emotionally driven activism for or against things they do not understand, or just ignore it.

To improve this article the author should do two tings (for kids):

1) Replace "global warming" right after defining it as a concept/label with a concept of ecological destruction/stresses (there temperatures variations can be talked about) - but its leads naturally into holistic understanding (for children)

2) Introduce immediately a concept of climate stabilization. There, immediately, it will come into blind alley as this is a blind spot of current atmospheric/climate science. And that is the point (and should be highlighted), that is the motivation -- we have to figure this out, and that is for the children to lock onto -- it opens up so many fields of inquiry. Meanwhile, give them sense of scale of things, use numbers that kids may be able to relate to, make them think and wonder and ponder.

This article feels like a dry school-test driven approach of "clergy approved citations and memes" to earn a good mark is not doing much service apart from having a class of yes-man future population.

As D. Bohm implored, we need heretics (engineers and scientists) ready to challenge for the sake of understanding of the issues as well as proposed solutions. At least, strive for such ideal.