US School Teaches Global Warming as Controversial Subject

The guardian has a story about this here

And here is my comment:

The hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming rests on three pillars: increasing proportion of atmospheric CO2 due to industrial activity, the greenhouse effect, high climate sensitivity due to water vapour amplification. While the first two pillars are uncontroversial and can be regarded as being scientifically proven, the final pillar is not, and by some considerable margin. There are many factors that undermine the concept of high climate sensitivity, for example if the earth climate system is non-linear on climatic time-scales then the detection and attribution arguments are weak. The reason so many climate scientists support the consensus is probably not for scientific reasons (the science is too immature, the uncertainties are too high, the systems too complex), but for political reasons: they are convinced--the arguments are not unreasonable--therefore scientific "certainty" is required to gain political movement.

Therefore teaching AGW as a controversial subject is entirely reasonable and nothing like teaching creationism and evolution.