(Jerry Sonnenberg don’t need no science — Promoted by Colorado Pols)
In a talk-radio appearance last week, Colorado State Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg (R-Sterling) had this to say about environmentalists concerned about carbon pollution, which is causing temperatures to rise on Earth:
SONNENBERG: [below at 3:45] So, you know, when we talk about carbon dioxide and those type of things, actually, those are important to agriculture and to the balance of nature. Trees and plants use carbon dioxide to create oxygen. It’s part of their process. And it’s nature’s way to make things work. So I guess my argument to those enviros that want less carbon is,”Here, you want to kill all the trees and plants.”
This type of climate-change denial is not taken seriously by the scientific community.
Even so-called “climate skeptics,” who deny the seriousness of global warming, at least acknowledge that human activities are contributing to a rise in global temperatures.
So Sonnenberg sits with an extreme fringe, which has representatives in high places. See Trump’s Chief of the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, who denies the link between Carbon emissions and climate change. See also Trump himself, who’s dismissed global warming as a hoax.
Sonnenberg, who spoke to KFTM-AM Dec. 6 from Nashville where was attending an unnamed energy task force meeting with other legislators, possibly as part of an American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), meeting did not immediately return a call seeking clarification or comment. Surprisingly, Sonnenberg said some of his conservative allies on the task force favored a carbon tax.
Sonnenberg’s position in denial of global warming is shared by other Republicans in Colorado, including apparentlyΒ Cory Gardner, who refused during the last election to tell Denver PostΒ Editorial Page Editor Chuck Plunkett whether he thinks humans are causing global warming.
Top Republican gubernatorial candidates in 2014, including current GOP contender for governor Tom Tancredo, had the same position as Sonnenberg.
SONNENBERG: [00:04:42] And when you look at the speck of time that we’re here on Earth, and we talk about climate change for the last — what?– 30, 40 years compared to the last 30, 40 million of cycles of the Earth — the climate cycles of the earth — we are a fraction — a very small fraction — in the time scale. And to think that humans have the ability to destroy the Earth is just ludicrous.
Sonnenberg scored an 11 percent on Conservation Colorado’s 2017 Environmental Scorecard.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
BY: DavidThi808
IN: Thursday Open Thread
BY: itlduso
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Thursday Open Thread
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Thursday Open Thread
BY: Ben Folds5
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
BY: ParkHill
IN: BREAKING: Matt Gaetz Pulls Out Of AG Nomination
BY: joe_burly
IN: Thursday Open Thread
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
That is a special kind of stupid. And really worthy of no response other than derision.
Well, but don't tell Jerry about how all them solar panels are sucking the energy right out of the sun… Pretty soon we'll all be shivering in the cold and dark.
Curse all you enviros!
How does that imbecile manage to dress himself?
Basic science that poor Jerry can't understand. Ahh, one day we'll have some scientific literacy from the right. Perhaps. Maybe.
This isn’t even “basic science,” . . .
. . . this is classic gee-I-wonder-how-trees-ever-managed-to-survive-on-this-planet-prior-to-our-industrial-revolution-Moderatus-level-fucking-stupidity?
ππ³π²π³ππππ³π³
The real radical environmentalists are these guys, the ones demonstrably costing Sonnenberg's constituents millions of dollars annually. He's in good company; our favorite watermelon farmer deleted his infamous tweet on the subject but he couldn't scrub the internets entirely as he remakes himself.
In other news (about radical environmentalists…)
He's making an extreme example but the fact that CO2 is necessary for life on earth is not in dispute.
And NO ONE has disputed that, moron.
Salt is necessary for life, but too much in your blood can kill you..too much potassium ( a necessary mineral) in your blood can make your heart slow to a full stop.
Too much carbon dioxide is overloading the climatic system…that's why Sonnenbergs' stupid accusation is so incredibly lame.
The level of CO2 has fluctuated throughout earth's history and we're still here. One supervolcano could make everything we do to reduce man made carbon emissions meaningless. Why should we hurt the economy to prevent something that happens anyway?
Unless it's about hurting the economy….
Nutlid, you need to make Google your friend.
PS: "Coal is dead"
PPS: Trump's Plans for Fossil Fuels Will Shrink the Economy
Unless your plan is about shrinking the economy….
Go do your homework, Moddy. Or do you enjoy the fact that wildfires in Colorado now hit 10x more acreage annually than they did in the 1970s, or that climate change enabled the pine beetle to devastate our forests. As for hurting the economy, again, do your homework. Highest in-demand job these days is wind turbine technician. Isn't it time you packed up and moved to West Virginny?
Like I needed even to say it . . .
Does Sonnenberg happen to live in his grammyβs basement?
So is water. I'm not suggesting you submerge your head in a bucket for 30 minutes. Really, I'm not.
If you're practicing to be the next White House Press Secretary Moddy, you've got a ways to go yet. But it was a valiant effort.
Unfortunately, Moldy and far too many Republicans are OK with that notion π
Exaggerated BS…
You're referring to Sonnenberg's comment, right?
A recent article in the Economist magazine offers that it is not only necessary to lessen carbon emissions, but equally necessary to get carbon that is in the air out of it. In his uneducated way, Sonnenberg is slightly right that reduced emissions may have an impact; albeit minimal; on growing plants. But carbon already in the air will keep them growing.