MNGOP attacks Dayton's support for clean energy in wake of UN climate change report

zellersthompson560.jpg
MNGOP gubernatorial candidates Kurt Zellers (left) and Dave Thompson don't buy the hype about climate change and the need for cleaner energy.
At the State Fair, Mark Dayton called for the state to move toward eliminating coal-burning power plants and said Minnesota ought to "be in the forefront of creating a cleaner environment."

SEE ALSO: Will Steger baffled by Tim Pawlenty's global warming flip flop

Nothing too out of the norm, right? But in the wake of new UN report that's raising questions about climate change, two Republicans who want to win their party's gubernatorial nomination are suggesting they plan to turn Dayton's support for clean energy into a campaign issue.

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report found there has been a "pause" in global warming since the late 1990s. The report was leaked to the British press earlier this month. From the Telegraph:
A leaked report to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seen by the Mail on [September 6], has led some scientists to claim that the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century.

If correct, it would contradict computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming. The news comes several years after the BBC predicted that the arctic would be ice-free by 2013 [Arctic ice levels were up significantly this year].
Of course, the report also notes that a relatively short-term cooling period is consistent with medium- and long-term projections of calamitous climate change.

It's unclear whether Sen. Dave Thompson, R-Lakeville, or Rep. Kurt Zellers, R-Maple Grove, read about the study. But in comments made yesterday to the Central Minnesota Tea Party, the two MNGOP gubernatorial hopefuls sounded a lot like Jeff Dubay.

The following passage reads like it's from the Onion, but it's really from the St. Cloud Times:
Energy issues also were part of [yesterday's tea party event in St. Cloud]. Both candidates said greater use of carbon-emitting fuels such as coal and natural gas should be encouraged, in lieu of state support for renewable sources such as wind or solar power.

"It might make us feel good to pass windmill legislation, even though it's killing bald eagles," Zellers said.

Thompson said he doesn't believe that global warming is occurring.

An overwhelming majority of published climate scientists and researchers disagree. They say global warming is happening and that man-made carbon emissions almost certainly are contributing to it.

But Thompson said he's not convinced.

"Global warming is a political movement, not a scientific one," Thompson said.
Well, at the least, making climate change a central campaign issue can't go any worse for Minnesota Republicans than harping on the marriage amendment did last year, can it?

h/t -- Bluestem Prairie

-- Follow Aaron Rupar on Twitter at @atrupar. Got a tip? Drop him a line at arupar@citypages.com.

My Voice Nation Help
56 comments
TheConservativeJerk
TheConservativeJerk topcommenter

EPA admits banning coal plants won't impact global warming -

“The EPA does not anticipate that this proposed rule will result in notable CO2 emission change,” the agency writes in its proposal to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

“EPA knows there aren’t benefits,” Dan Simmons, director of regulatory and state affairs at the Institute for Energy Research, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “EPA and environmentalists are being disingenuous when they claim this rule will have an impact on the climate or the environment.”



TheConservativeJerk
TheConservativeJerk topcommenter

clean energy HURTS the poor because it's more expensive.

TheConservativeJerk
TheConservativeJerk topcommenter

why do you greenies hate teachers and public state employees?

2 of the top 5 investments of the teachers/state employee pension is BIG OIL.

#2 is EXXON

#4 is Chevron 

Seth Engman
Seth Engman

Why is the MNGOP on a constant race to the bottom?

Deborah Anderson Nelson
Deborah Anderson Nelson

Oh and tell that to the 97% of scientists who believe in global warming and that it is caused by us. Look at the new IPCc report stronger and stronger evidence. This is science!

Deborah Anderson Nelson
Deborah Anderson Nelson

sad. I talked to sen. Thompson at the fair. He said we all care about the environment, we just think there is a better way. I gulped and let him get away with this nonsense. I'm ashamed.

Deborah Anderson Nelson
Deborah Anderson Nelson

Minnesota GOP used to be smarter than this. The political movement is called ignorance and the GOP is embracing it.

kashmir1377
kashmir1377

Minnesota Republicans in the legislature voted against the clean energy bill this in the past session, so framing Zellers and Thompson's statements as a reaction tto the United Nations  report may help you troll Jeff Dubay, but it's a clear  distortion of the news.  There's no mention of the report in the St. Cloud Times article and my understanding is that it wasn't mentioned at the Tea Party meeting.  Headline and copy distorts the issue, badly.

Laurel Richmond
Laurel Richmond

How can these fools actually convince themselves that clean energy is bullshit and that there are no repercussions for the "dirty" energy we're so reliant upon?? Are they that blinded by their corporate sponsors? I think so.

Ran Dazzle
Ran Dazzle

of course they did and the same sheep will vote for these morons over and over

Matt Touchette
Matt Touchette

I am guessing that Dan is referring to the trend in the UN's report stating that the rate of warming has been slowing, while our use of fossil fuels as been increases.

kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

So the Jury is still out regarding "Global Warming."    We have seen time after time "evidence" being cooked, manipulated and falsified.  There is no scientific consensus that the "warming" (if it was conclusive) is caused by humanity, and if it was, we have no ability to control it. 

 But what is conclusive is that Democrats in cooperation with their unholy alliance with the media, will use this issue to Tax, Regulate and gain power.    We see the lunatic's on the left giving no argument and just attacking and calling names as indicated in these posts.   


The Earth will survive us!   The temp goes up and the temp goes down.   So the Global Warming was re-named "climate change" because people were not buying what the Bat-Crazy's were selling.   Just like there is no market for alternative sources and the Federal Dollars that were doled out by Obama et. al to crony's who produced products there was no market for.   Let's face it, there is no market for Trains, street cars, and rental bikes in Mpls Metro.  Just like there was no market for the crony hand-outs that O gave to companies trying to produce battery operated cars, wind-mills, and solar.  They are now bankrupt because people know better. 

Mary Karius
Mary Karius

I thought all stupid politicians lived in the south...or Wisconsin.

Robynn M. Erdman
Robynn M. Erdman

I'm vaguely confused - so the only reason to use cleaner, renewable sources of energy is to prevent global warming? No. How about we do this because it is the right thing to do.

Chris Cloutier
Chris Cloutier

i hope that dayton quotes pawlenty in his resonpse!

digitalprotocol
digitalprotocol topcommenter

COAL!  these dumb fkn hicks. 

only a complete fool would think that concern for the natural environment is politically motivated.

what is the motivation?  fkn hicks.

jpkolb
jpkolb

@atrupar Nobody is against cost effective renewable energy. What GOP objects to is raising energy costs in the name of junk science.

_Joe_
_Joe_

@TheConservativeJerk  

Honestly dude, when you post 4 comments in a row and nobody responds - take a hint.  Nobody cares what you think, and no one wants to converse with you.

MicheleBachmann
MicheleBachmann topcommenter

@kurt124 Idiots like you are why I would never vote for a Republican.  What vision do you have?   Coal and oil are obviously bad ideas.   Solar and wind are the future.  We need progressives elected to public office so that government helps push science into new and exciting directions.  Sticking your head in the sand and trying to force us to use 1900s technology is how losers think.   I want the United States to spend and lead the world in new technology.  Dumb dinosaurs like you need to die off.    

MNjoe
MNjoe topcommenter

@kurt124 P.S. The Hiawatha Line is doing quite well and I see Nice Ride bikes out on the streets and trails all the time. You are wrong and Dayton will easily be re-elected on this and many other issues.

MNjoe
MNjoe topcommenter

@kurt124 "We see the lunatic's on the left giving no argument and just attacking and calling names as indicated in these posts."  Really? You're name-calling and complaining about name-calling in the same sentence. And by the way, you don't use an apostrophy in lunatics unless it's possessive.  Please learn English. 

_Joe_
_Joe_

@kurt124 There is no "jury" in science, moron.  There is only 'currently accepted as fact based on available information.' And the phenomenon you are talking about is widely accepted among the scientific community.

As I've stated before, only an idiot thinks he's entitled to an opinion when it comes to science.

digitalprotocol
digitalprotocol topcommenter

@kurt124 so then drilling the earth and leaking crude all over the place, then burning it NONSTOP and making plastic shit has no effect on the natural environment?

the constant and ever increasing VISIBLE pollutants that humans create has ZERO effect on the natural world?


earth will kill us


kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

@Robynn M. Erdman Why then is it the right thing to do?   We have plenty of coal, Oil, natural gas.  It's a great industry.   You like to drive and fly dont you?

digitalprotocol
digitalprotocol topcommenter

@Robynn M. Erdman right and wrong are human constructs. 

you think the motivation is wrong?

kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

@jpkolb @atrupar My thoughts exactly!  When there is a market and a reasonable source of production, this type of thing will have it's place.  We have more Oil, Coal, and natural gas than we will ever need anyway.    But look at the ad hominem attacks when even suggesting such a reasonable things.  

MicheleBachmann
MicheleBachmann topcommenter

@jpkolb Republicans are against cost effective renewable energy because they are bribed by oil and gas companies.   

digitalprotocol
digitalprotocol topcommenter

@jpkolb i hope you like eating pig slop

kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

@MicheleBachmann @kurt124 Ha.  You haters are hilarious.  Just listen to yourself, wishing people to die off.   But it is your constituency that has the demographic problem.    Liberals like you, typically not very attractive, have more pets than children, if any children at all.  Your outlook on life is pathetic.    Wherever your party controls is dying off.   Taxpayer on demand abortion, cities controlled by democrats die off like Detroit.     You must always keep an underclass, who you give free stuff to in order to get votes.    Your parties unholy alliance with Unions (also dying off because folks are privy to this special interest, or underclass to which their tax dollars go, and then back to the democrat party through campaign contributions), and endless bogus programs that lift no one up that keep an underclass that is not permanent.    "1900 technology" you say.   Look who is pushing public transportation trains that nobody rides.   Now, off to being successful.  Take it easy on all the hate!   

kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

@MNjoe @kurt124 Hiawatha line is doing well you say?  Are you serious?  Do you know how many folks ride that money pit?  No one rides that bad form of public transport.  I like to ride bikes too.  I just cant drive one to work.   But these Green bikes Rybeck has around Mpls!   Again, the proof is in the numbers, look it up.   Who wants to hop on a train?   Thanks for the grammar lesson.   Who cares?   

kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

@_Joe_ @kurt124Who is the "Scientific Community?"    Do you think your ad hominem attacks are convincing anyone?   Take a look at the Opposition research in your "Scientific Community."    I can remember in the '70's your  "Scientific Community" proposed it was Global Cooling.  

We know that the "Scientific Community" has cooked the data in the past on several occasions.    We are still here aren't we?  When do you expect the world to end?    Open up your reading list and sources and do not worry too much, moron. 


 http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30000


kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

@digitalprotocol @kurt124 I would not go that far. I mean i am reasonable.   It has an effect on the natural environment when i drive around Minneapolis and  MacDonalds trash gets thrown out of the car window and is sitting in the gutter of the street or my yard.  At that point it effects the environment.   Drilling into the Earth has no negative effect.    An oil spill in and of itself does, but to scale and to how much we can extract with new technology it's just fine and getting better.  

digitalprotocol
digitalprotocol topcommenter

@kurt124 do you know how other countries, in the third world, make coal?


they burn down their forests

digitalprotocol
digitalprotocol topcommenter

@kurt124  burning coal is not reasonable. coal is destroying african forests. 

maybe you pinheads should consider the fact that coal is dirty and destructive

MNjoe
MNjoe topcommenter

@kurt124 @MNjoe Why don't you look it up for me Kurt? That is if you can with your mediocre English skills. If you're too stupid to know your own native language, you're too stupid to argue with.  F off!

_Joe_
_Joe_

@kurt124 Ladies and gentlemen, I give you an idiot who thinks he's entitled to an opinion when it comes to science.

Seriously dude.  You can hide your head in the frac sand all you want, but it won't change facts.  I wish it did.  I'd be right there along side you.

kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

@MicheleBachmann Nice conspiracy theory.   Once again the unhinged libs ad hominem attacks are not convincing.   I have posted evidence of this cooking of the data by NASA in addition to other bogus reports.  You see, when a scientist publishes a theory it does receive opposition, which your narrow mind refuses to admit or even read.   So it does not surprise me that you haters call people names like stupid idiots.  You should see how crazy this makes you appear.    Stop hating the evidence and broaden your mind a bit.   Tell me when the world is going to end?    The temp goes up and it comes down.   The Earth is constantly changing.   Just because there is a tornado does not mean the world is coming to an end!    If your such a genius, how do you reconcile that these genius scientist were calling it Global Cooling the the 70's?    How do you reconcile the sea ice report this week?    No need to get back to me on that, but please ease your anxiety a bit, stop worrying so much and try and enjoy your pathetic life. 

MicheleBachmann
MicheleBachmann topcommenter

@kurt124  Joe is listening to scientists.  See science gets lots of credibility because when a scientist says something he has to prove what he is saying is correct.   Once a scientist publishes a theory there are lots of other scientists who do everything they can to prove the theory wrong. Sometimes science is wrong but that always gets exposed eventually via observation and experimentation.   


You are listening to lobbyists and con artists paid by the oil companies to trick extremely stupid people (you and keny) into doubting science so they can make more money.   Seriously are you honestly so dumb that you can't tell who the liars are?   Do you realize that a lot of the "scientists" who call Global Climate Change a myth are the same "scientists" the tobacco companies hired to argue about the health benefits of smoking?    Stupid easily conned idiots like you hurt the world.   

keny1
keny1

@kurt124

Joe gets all of his "facts" from MSNBC and Mother Jones.

_Joe_
_Joe_

@kurt124 We'll just do it in your backyard then, yes?  And leave all that shit that leaks out for you to deal with it.  Totally positive, right?

digitalprotocol
digitalprotocol topcommenter

@kurt124 do you know how deep they drill?  in the ocean? that is negative for sure. you cannot contain oil in water. 

google oil rigs in the gulf, shit is absurd. common sense says use the sun for energy

kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

@digitalprotocol @kurt124 How can you know it does?   We drill into the earth to tap H2O, build buildings, extract oil.................   Common sense and logic.     I need a COMMON SENSE designation.  Best Regards  TOP COMMENTER. 

digitalprotocol
digitalprotocol topcommenter

@kurt124 drilling into the earth has no negative effect?  how can you know this?

digitalprotocol
digitalprotocol topcommenter

@kurt124 so you didnt refute what i had to say about coal... 

and your response is rife with errors. not sure what your point is?  that i emit C02?  big deal. Who practices CCS? nobody...

my only point, and a salient one, is that coal is dead tech, its literally dead organic matter. it is dirty, harmful to all and is making these fathead sellouts bags of money.

it would seem that these two Reps are indeed against renewable energy and liekly believe that the earth is 6000 years old. 

what do you believe? lets guage your aptitude and reasoning

kurt124
kurt124 topcommenter

@digitalprotocol @kurt124 It's not reasonable because you say so? Because your lack of argument and insulting tone are making such a great case?   Ever heard of CCS, Carbon Capture and Storage?    Your full of and emitting to much CO2,  Mr. "Top Commenter".     Again, no one is against cost effective renewable energy!   But there is no such thing.   Let me know when your wind mill and batteries get a plane off the ground, or a ship full of products over the sea. 

Now Trending

Minnesota Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...