Denier vs. Warmist: Who made the crazier statement about CO2?

Let’s match Rep. Dana Rohrbacher versus warmist deity, the late Dr. Stephen Schneider of Stanford.

As the news hook for this match-up consider this Salon article. In “GOP climate deniers insist on remaining easy targets,” Salon writes:

The official Republican strategy is to challenge Obama’s new climate plan by emphasizing its cost in jobs, rising gas prices, and more jobs. Yet a small but vocal Congressional contingent remains insistent on denying the scientific evidence for global warming, Politico reports.

Take, for example, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R.-Calif.) , who told Politico: “If anything, [CO2] helps people’s health by making plants grow and making more food available.”

This sort of statement is more or less standard fare from climate deniers. It’s also exactly what Dems are hoping for more of… [Emphasis added]

So compare Rohrbacher’s comment with the following September 2009 comment from Schneider:

There’s no such thing as a safe level [of CO2].

So which comment makes who the easier target?

8 thoughts on “Denier vs. Warmist: Who made the crazier statement about CO2?”

  1. You have to remember that the overall premise governing liberal or progressive mentality is overpopulation and all their thinking, their nefarious government programs, is controlled by the need to reduce global population. Starving a billion or so is a good start.

  2. “There’s no such thing as a safe level [of CO2].”

    Dr. Stephen Schneider of Stanford . . . actually said that ? ? ?
    Imagine a world where CO2 levels were at say 100 PPM . . . or maybe even 50 PPM . . . don’t think we could ever get rid of it all . . .
    What do you suppose the World would look like ?
    Why the world would look just like the good Doctor . . . DEAD ! ! !

  3. I cannot believe how many ‘so called’ educated people in the USA can make such ridiculous statements about CO2 – life depends 100% on three things 1/ CO2 2/ Water and 3/ Sunlight (light energy) to provide for photosythesis which without, we are all dead! How hard is that basic scientific principle to understand – beats me!

  4. This reminds me of the brilliant comment that Jay Rockefeller once made that he wanted to get a stream to be clean by getting its pH to zero.

  5. Rep. Rohrbacher’s statement is correct. Schneider’s is planetary suicide. Only one of these statements is crazy.

  6. Really? No such thing as a safe level of C02. Whoever said that seems to be blissfully unaware that ALL THE PLANTS in the world require C02 to even exist. The level of ignorance the warmists exhibit is appalling… what happened to our education system to allow people by the millions to not understand the basic principles of science? C02 IS NOT a greenhouse gas. It is NOT the product of warming, it is the result of warming brought on by other causes. Damn, it’s hard to be tolerant when one is surrounded by such idiocy!

  7. We now have seven billion people to feed…
    With CO2 at 100 ppm above what it was 70
    years ago we’re doing it. Seventy wears ago
    there were half that many…and we’re doing it!
    We were lucky even then because nature allowed
    us to exist….drop back another 100 and we’re all
    dead…

Comments are closed.