Ron Johnson, Tea Party GOP Senate Candidate, Explains Climate Change As A Result Of 'Sunspot Activity' (VIDEO)

Ron Johnson, the Tea Party-backed GOP Senate candidate hoping to topple Sen. Russ Feingold in Wisconsin, has a simple explanation for why climate change is not a human-created phenomenon. He calls it "sunspot activity," and says that this analysis leaves the issue of global shifts in climate completely out of our hands.

Here's what Johnson told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial board, via the Washington Post's Greg Sargent:

If you take a look at geologic time, we've had huge climate swings. We're sitting here in Wisconsin. Had it not been for climate swings, we'd be sitting on a two or three hundred foot thick glacier. Man wasn't around back then. So no, I absolutely do not believe that the science of man-caused climate change is proven. Not by any stretch of the imagination. I think it's far more likely that it's just sunspot activity, or something just in the geologic eons of time where we have changes in the climate.

The Middle Ages was an extremely warm period of time, too. It wasn't like there were tons of cars on the road. So it always strikes me as a little absurd for anybody to think, Okay, this is the sweet spot in geologic time for climate. And it's such a good place, that we have spent trillions of dollars, and do great harm to our economy, on a fool's errand. I don't think we can do anything about controlling what the climate is.

Such a stance is not unusual for Johnson, whose recent history of apologizing for polluters includes a proposal to open up the Great Lakes for offshore drilling due to the irreconcilable fact that "we are an oil-based economy." Last month, he also made news when he said that he'd dump his BP stock, but only after its value went back up.

At any rate, however, Johnson's proposal that current climate trends could be better explained by "sunspot activity," or perhaps by what he calls a "sweet spot in geologic time for climate," seems overly simplistic at best. But such outright denial of man-made climate change is right in line with what a wide variety of GOP candidates -- including the entire field of New Hampshire Republican Senate candidates -- are, in part, choosing to run on.

Perhaps it shouldn't be surprising then that, when asked what effect -- if any -- carbon dioxide emissions might have on the planet, Johnson responded:

"I think it gets sucked down by trees and helps trees grow."

Watch Ron Johnson blame climate change on "sun spot activity":

Comments

[TeresaV]

11:21 PM on 08/29/2010

All the pollution from the burning of fossil fuels and industry emissions had NO play in this of course and the countless TONS of trash dumped into our oceans each year has NO bearing whatsoever because some Repub says so to protect their corporate special interests as usual. They always talk about the DEBT our kids will inherit which will be totally irrevelevant if our air and water is so filthy nobody will be to breath or have clean water to drink which is happening all over the world.
Clean up your act boys!!

[ZeraLee]

09:57 PM on 08/24/2010

If it costs money to fix, then it isn't a real problem.

See no evil, hear no evil, fix no evil.

[Uncle Bill]

03:24 PM on 08/23/2010

Solar activity does play a role in earth's climate, but it isn't the sunspots (they are cooler and therefore less luminous areas on the surfact of the sun) that are the cause- they are merely signs of overall solar activity and can accompany solar flares which have a more immediate and short term effect on the Earth. Solar radiation cycles are already part of climate models and are insufficient to account for all of current rise in average global temperatures.

If Ron Johnson intended to make an intellectually honest evaluation of climate change, he would have discovered that his theory was included in current models and had been rejected as a sole cause of climate change nearly fifty years ago, but Johnson isn't interested in truth, rather he is interested in creating excuses for the special interests he is campaigning to serve.

[Hitchcockcameo]

03:54 PM on 08/23/2010

Just to clarify, though, Sun spot activity corresponds to periods of higher temperatures on the sun. Smooth, quite periods on the surface of the Sun corresponds to cooler solar temperatures.

[Uncle Bill]

04:19 PM on 08/23/2010

True, but I stated that the Spots were cooler areas, not that the Sun was cooler overall when sunspot activity is high.

[MikeWebster]

10:20 PM on 08/23/2010

I think that high sunspot activity is correlated to a reduction in solar energy reaching the Earth.

[TaiJi2]

03:21 PM on 08/23/2010

Look, after the next big asteroid strike or the next super-volcano eruption this point will be moot. For the interim, we should be focused on climate control. It doesn't MATTER why the globe is warming; it matters that it threatens our survival because of the precarious balance we live in. If we're going to keep this many billions of people on the planet, we're going to need to be able to RELIABLY feed them, right? Personally, I'm in agreement with Carl Sagan - any single planet species is doomed to extinction.

[JNarragansett]

02:37 PM on 08/23/2010

What a fool, we all know that AGW is a fact. I know that it's supposed to be theory, but unlike everything else in science, we should approach this not from a skeptical position, but from one that we are trying to confirm our original suspicions. That's how we know what we say is fact, not theory. Of course this means that all of the facts are in on the causes of climate change, and we understand them all. Anyone offering anything different than the accepted AGW fact should be ridiculed out of existence. Sun spots, ha, like the sun has anything to do with the climate here on earth.

[MikeWebster]

10:28 PM on 08/23/2010

You'll find that like any other area of science the theory of climate change is supported by testing it against the evidence. The evidence certainly agrees with the theory. This does not mean that the theory is absolutely proven, but that things like sun spots etc. have been very closely looked at and ruled out as they do not explain the climate changes we are seeing.

To give you an overview - climatologists have discovered that over millions of years the climate has changed from glacial periods to warm periods. They have studied how these events happened - often due to changes in solar radiation, and have also understood the role of CO2 in these historic climate changes.

At present we can't blame the sun, its not behaving that much differently. We can blame CO2 because the satellites now detect that the Earth is emitting less longwave radiation in the CO2 absorption bands.

Skepticism is exactly how the confidence in the theory is increased. The kind of skepticism you display is not based on knowledge of science or knowledge of the scientific method.

[JNarragansett]

10:06 AM on 08/24/2010

It's a little far to say that anything has been ruled out in terms of sun spot activity, and while I may have seemed to ridicule the science, the target was more the intellectual atmosphere surrounding the issue. The consensus is more political and manufactured than scientific, but that by itself doesn't change the veracity of the proposed theory.

There are questions related to the accuracy of our information we are using to create our forecasts and to whether or not the proposed solutions would actually accomplish anything other than economic harm.

I appreciate your reasoned response, do you have some resources for your comment that the emission of long-wave radiation has been decreasing?

[hoagie76]

02:10 PM on 08/23/2010

He cites no proof of what the climate was like in the Middle Ages. Where are your sources sir?

[edwcorey]

02:03 PM on 08/23/2010

Too bad stupidity isn't a crime. This guy'd do life.

[IYouWe]

01:54 PM on 08/23/2010

Thanks Dr Johnson for your scientific guesstimate, i feel so safe and secure now.

[johnqpublik]

01:09 PM on 08/23/2010

Hold on a minute, despite what you're thoughts on man-made global warming are, the NASA think provided in this article agrees that it is quite possible sunspots and solar radiation levels PARTLY play a role.

To dismiss it "overly simplistic at best" while linking to contrary evidence is very misleading.

From the very first paragraph:

"Of the many trends that appear to cause fluctuations in the Sun’s energy, those that last decades to centuries are the most likely to have a measurable impact on the Earth’s climate in the foreseeable future. Many researchers believe the steady rise in sunspots and faculae since the late seventeenth century may be responsible for as much as half of the 0.6 degrees of global warming over the last 110 years (IPCC, 2001). Since pre-industrial times, it’s thought that the Sun has given rise to a global heating similar to that caused by the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If the past is any indication of things to come, solar cycles may play a role in future global warming."
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/SORCE/sorce_04.php

[Hitchcockcameo]

04:03 PM on 08/23/2010

Of course the Sun plays a partial role. No one disputes that. Put notice "Partial" is the key word here. The rest of the temperature change is where the concern lies.

"Sun has given rise to a global heating similar to that caused by the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere." See this? The increase in CO2. Effects are being compounded by man-made influences.

[SeeDaddy]

12:24 PM on 08/23/2010

Johnson is full of BS. Fact: The years between 1150 -1460 and between 1560 - 1850 are referred to as "The Mini Ice Age." Check it out on Wikipedia, or search it on Bing, or Google.

[floodmfx]

12:17 PM on 08/23/2010

But the Earth IS flat

[StopMakingSense2]

11:58 AM on 08/23/2010

Since the republicans don't believe in the search for the truth I am highly skeptical when they make any claims based on science. Like the constitution to them, it only matters when politically expedient.

[TheRevV]

12:08 PM on 08/23/2010

Bingo! All people should follow this example.

[derspado]

11:29 AM on 08/23/2010

Wow. A senate candidate using common sense.

[Monk2001]

11:53 AM on 08/23/2010

????

Yes it's much more logical that the hottest temps on records are due to "sun spots" WHEN the only Scientists who come to this conclusion are one funded by the (R) wing and Corps, who just happen to be the largest air polluters.

It takes less common sense to think that man has any effect on his environment.

I don't get your post... either it's sarcasm OR you're a m0r0n.

[hang319]

01:48 PM on 08/23/2010

I've seen this one before -- he's a m0r0n.

[SeeDaddy]

12:28 PM on 08/23/2010

No. Actually, common ignorance of known climatic history. Middle Ages were cold, as in the Mini Ice Age. Check it out. Do a search on "Mini Ice Age."

[Dave24]

10:58 AM on 08/23/2010

I love when the scientifically illiterate try using science to support their absurd positions, from political expedience to preserving pathetic ancient dogmas better known as religion.

[thankgodimanatheist8]

10:45 AM on 08/23/2010

God did it - great excuse for doing nothing.

[Monk2001]

11:53 AM on 08/23/2010

Yup... it's annoying that some people hide behind and bastardize their own faith to justify being horrible.