by Peter MacLachlan, Hamilton, Montana
We have seen increasingly over the past few decades, a wide-spread outcry against the connection between church and state. As stated in the First Amendment, ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ the last part being at the heart of the debate. The meaning of the First Amendment has been endlessly discussed and it’s not my intention to discuss it further – only to add a wrinkle.
I’m not sure if we have a standard in place for the definition of religion, stating what qualifies it. But we have seen, over the past several years, a body of thought, ideas and data (some would include principles) of a belief system that might qualify as religion – that has been, in the past few months dramatically displayed not only on this opinion page, but in the state legislature as well.
by Dr. Ed Berry
Rep Doug Coffin (D), Missoula, Professor of Molecular Biology at the U of Montana, sponsored HJ 10. I presented my rebuttal to the Montana House Committee on Natural Resources on February 13, 2011.
Whereas some proponents of HJ-10 said they were students of the Climate Change program at the U of Montana, and one proponent referenced a climate lecture by Dr. Steve Running, ecologist (not atmospheric physicist), and Whereas HJ-10 is sponsored by a science professor at the U of Montana, and Whereas HJ-10 demonstrates without a shadow of doubt that the U of Montana Climate Change program is unadulterated pseudo science, …
Therefore, here are some questions for Professor Coffin and Dr. Steve Running on some basics of climate change science. [Read more…]
by Dr. Ed Berry
I presented this rebuttal to the Montana House Committee on Natural Resources on February 13, 2011. You may download the PDF I prepared for the committee.
Rep Doug Coffin (D), Missoula, Professor of Molecular Biology at the U of Montana, sponsored HJ 10. Information about Rep Doug Coffin is here. The HJ 10 legislative draft is here. Continuing Bill information will be here. Download PDF.
The Legislature must reject HJ-10 because it is based upon the false premise – that climate science is settled – that has been rejected by the Montana Supreme Court.
The Legislature also must reject HJ-10 because it is totally wrong about climate science, makes significant logical and scientific errors, and proposes RESOLUTIONS that would reduce climate science to a government-dictated catechism to be memorized and obeyed and legalize and promote indoctrination and brainwashing in our schools and universities.
Part 1. Two key reasons to reject HJ-10 [Read more…]
Hearing for HJ 10 is scheduled for: Wednesday, Feb 13, 3 p.m., Rm 172, Helena
House Joint Resolution Number 10
A Joint Resolution of the Senate And The House Of Representatives
of the State Of Montana stating that
Climate Change is Scientifically Valid and Represents an Ecological Threat [Read more…]
by Dr. Ed Berry
On May 4, 2011, attorneys Thomas Beers, Elizabeth Best, Randall Bishop, Amy Poehling Eddy, James Manley, and Gregory Munro, filed a “Petition for Original Jurisdiction” in the Montana Supreme Court. The Petition argued:
“Petitioners respectfully petition this Court, …, to take original jurisdiction of this proceeding and enter judgment declaring (1) that the State of Montana holds the atmosphere in trust for the present and future citizens of the state of Montana, and (2) that the State of Montana has the affirmative duty to protect and preserve the atmospheric trust, including establishing and enforcing limitations on the levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as necessary to mitigate human caused climate change.”
The goal of this Petition was to overstep the authority of the Montana legislature and have the Montana Supreme Court order Montana to significantly reduce Montana’s carbon dioxide emissions.
This, of course, would have shut down Montana’s economy as fast as an invasion by a foreign country. The Petition wrote: [Read more…]
by Dr. Ed Berry, copy of my letter published in Daily Inter Lake, January 24, 2012
Dr. Eric Grimsrud argued, in a Daily Inter Lake letter on January 6 [see below], we must not approve the Keystone pipeline because it would allow us to burn more carbon fuels, which would add to atmospheric CO2 and thereby damage our planet.
Grimsrud claims “American science” on climate change is “settled.” However, the Montana Supreme Court ruled otherwise on June 15, 2011. [Read more…]