Ed Berry, PhD, Theoretical Physics
The Montana Public Service Commission has a once-in-a -lifetime opportunity to defeat the Democrat climate alarmists and overturn Held v Montana.
The Held v Montana plaintiffs filed a petition requesting the Public Service Commission to “consider” the “adverse climate impacts of greenhouse gas emissions” in its decisions.
There are only two possible outcomes:
(1) the PSC rejects the petition.
This is the worst possible outcome because it will strengthen the Petitioners’ position. PSC’s rejection will be taken as more evidence that the Held v Montana Plaintiffs are correct about climate change because Republicans are afraid to challenge Plaintiffs’ climate claims. The Petitioners will file a new lawsuit against the PSC for refusing to “consider” climate change in its energy decisions. The PSC will then lose this lawsuit because its position would be indefensible.
(2) the PSC accepts the petition.
If the PSC accepts this petition, the PSC will turn the table on the Petitioners. The PSC will control the “consideration” of climate change. The PSC will hold its own hearings on climate outside of a courtroom. They may invite scientists on both sides of the climate issue to present their arguments and debate their opponents. I confidently predict these presentations and debates will overwhelmingly prove the Petitioners’ climate claims are a fraud.
If the PSC accepts the Petition, the PSC will save Montana, America, and the world.
PSC’s “consideration” of climate change will settle the climate change issue in Montana and be a climate law precedent to America and the world. PSC’s “consideration” can be completed in 2024, maybe before the Montana Supreme Court rules on Held v Montana.
The PSC “consideration” will override the climate part of Held v Montana because Montana’s AG Knudsen did not defend climate truth. Rather, he stipulated at the beginning of the trial that he agrees with the Plaintiffs on climate change, thereby betraying all Montana Republicans.
There were 3 categories of testifiers at the PSC hearing on April 8, 2024.
- (a) Climate alarmists who want the PSC to accept the Petition.
- (b) Climate realists who want the PSC to reject the Petition.
- (c) One climate realist (me) who read the Petition and wants the PSC to accept the Petition.
Since (a) had by far the most votes, the PSC has a good reason to accept the Petition.
The PSC will soon decide whether it will control the evaluation of the Petitioners’ climate claims or kick the can down the road and let the Petitioners wag the PSC.
So glad with your powerful messages, Ed! Agree with you one100%!! Keep on hammering!
André
AGW is a scientific fraud. It spurns the scientific method (as AGW has never been experimentally demonstrated). I violates causality (as multiple recent papers show the warming precedes the rising CO2…. IN THE MODERN RECORD). And it violates the 2nd Law as 90%+ of the warming is in the oceans, yet the oceans are warmer than the air and thus following the 2nd Law cannot be warmed by them.
There is no debate on the above issues.
The AGW scam is a classic example of argument from false premises as is the religion of socialism
OVERTURN Held vs Montana. This is ridiculous!!! Yes, the climate is changing as it has been since the dinosaurs or earlier but not because of CO2.
Congratulations and well done. I have never understood a forced premise without open debate. All over the world governments are hurting folks and being dishonest to kids for money and control. I appreciate folks like you who step up to make the truth available.
Good luck with the next step.
Thank you for trying to open the eyes of the people. There are too many variables for global warming and the science is far from proven to have all of these sheeple herding to all electric (which can’t be sustained at this point).
I have been reading you for a while and I can only hope that other scientists will be able to have their voices heard.
Thank you again!
Thank you for sharing
This quasi-religion must surely come to an end sometime! But, in the meantime, it is driven (in order to make money and gain political ‘clout’ to manipulate the Public for its’ proponents) by having so many in the population who are gullible, and who seem to thrive on bad news. Unfortunately, it has been ever this throughout history!
To quote Mark Twain: “If you don’t read the newspaper, you are ill-informed. If you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed!” (And nothing’s change since Samuel Clemens was working on Mississippi River steamboats.)
Overall, there is this formula that drives it: FEAR + IGNORANCE = STUPIDITY! And until human nature changes, the problem will remain with us. Indeed: Two psychiatrists met one day. The first looked the other deep in the eyes, and said: “You look alright! How am I?”
P.S. And, well done again Ed for continuing to tell the truth!
And for readers of this article, perhaps check this little compilation that I’ve assembled: http://www.galileomovement.com.au/media/SaveThePlanet.pdf ….. (And you might just find that Ed Berry features in it!)
I previously sent Dr Berry three papers, two of which correct the climate hysteria, and one shows how humanity’s energy problem could be solved with a technology known for 3500 years.
Unfortunately, the participants of the discussion do not approach from the side of chemistry, even though this shows the solution.
If anyone is interested in the thesis, I will gladly send it to you.
Csaba Huszar is a retired chemical engineer from Hungary.
I would be interested in reading your three papers, especially the one about the 3500 year old technology to solve humanities energy problem. I’m not a chemical engineer so hopefully I will be able to understand.
Thanks for your time,
Dan Artz
Dear Dan,
please write your email address and I will send the paper. This is under review for a journal, so it can only be forwarded personally.
Regards
Csaba
Dear Dan and Huszar,
If you wish, I can connect you via your email addresses. That way you will not need to display your email addresses.
Ed
email to Huzar Csaba: could you email your three papers to al.mathieu@orange.fr?
Try some simple arithmetic. CO2 is 420ppm and only 2-3 % of CO2 man made = one part in approx. 80,000. This the proportionate number we are dealing with. Do we really think messing around with that 1 part is going to affect anything in a 4 billion year old system.
I would be happy to take it and thank you very much
Csaba
“Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive” Sir Walter Scott
And how they have deceived!
The basic issues will not go away, hence the tangle, the escalation of commitment, and of course the subsequent cognitive dissonance.
The plaintiff’s petition appears laughable and a reverse of their desired intention, but one cannot afford to be complacent or forget the consequences of their actions or the intentions of their controllers.
What are the ultimate outcomes, power, money, genocide? What is the grand plan, the ruin of human society and our beautiful world?
Thank you Ed Berry for keeping up your effort.
These two reports will be of interest to everyone.
https://montanafreepress.org/2024/04/30/montana-public-service-commission-extends-comment-deadline-for-climate-petition/
https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/icf-report-2024/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
This link may shine some light on proposed policies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xD9qEdHFIE
But ‘they’ are quite prepared to ruin everyone trying.