Off to Porto University. Then back to speak in Kalispell.

by Ed Berry, Ph.D., Physics

On September 7, I will present a summary of my climate research to scientists at the international climate conference, “Basic Science of a Changing Climate,” at Porto University, Portugal.

On September 11, I will present the same talk but slower to a public audience in Kalispell, Montana.

Roger Roots, J.D., Ph.D., 2018 candidate for Clerk of the Montana Supreme Court, organized my Kalispell talk. It will be at Sykes Diner at 6:00 pm. To read a flyer announcing my Kalispell talk, click here.

I have never worked harder to prepare for a talk as I have for my talk in Porto. I have targeted it for 15 minutes to allow time for discussion.

I make a complete case in 16 slides to show why human CO2 emissions do not make enough change in the CO2 in the atmosphere to cause climate change. Nature, not humans, causes climate change.

After September 11, I will accept other invitations to present my climate case to other interested groups.

That is it for now. I have got to get ready to go to Porto. If you are in northwest Montana, I will see you on September 11.


  1. If you are willing, please distribute the 16 slides of your presentation to the GWR group after presentation at Porto University. Thanks much!

    Dennis Ortega

  2. Best of luck to you Dr. Ed. May your knowledge and preparation give you calm assurance and ready recall for the Q&A.

  3. Best of luck on your Porto-presentation. Remember; In preparation, the objective is to know more about your subject than anyone else in the room!

    On CO2, I have just started to read the original Arrhenius paper on his estimate of CO2 – temperature change. Amazingly, he used moonlight transmission through our atmosphere at various moon elevation angles to evaluate the role of CO2 in the absorption of infrared radiation from one to 10 microns wavelength. One of his and Langley’s conclusions was that the full moon surface temperature was about 100C (the result of 15 or more days of constant sunshine). In his data analysis, he acknowledged that both water vapor absorption and CO2 absorption would combine to present the observed extinguishing of the intensity at any given infrared wavelength. In his day (1895-6) they only had balloon observations up to perhaps 10,000′ or so to evaluate the H2O content of the atmosphere for his observations. I do not see any data processing like solving two equations in two unknowns (CO2 and H2O). Rather he employed point-by-point comparisons and some experimental logic to come to a conclusion as to the CO2 effect especially when the CO2 content increases. Assuming that CO2 percent concentration is constant with altitude, then the CO2 weight traversed at some elevation angle (viz 20-30 degrees) is double that at the zenith (90 degrees). His observations, though numerous, are barely enough to come to good conclusions.

    In my opinion, someone today needs to:

    A- Re-process his data completely.
    B- Repeat his moon observations.
    C- Do more experiments and analysis to quantify the alleged “greenhouse effect as delta T vs CO2 concentration.

    Such work should make several MS and PhD theses . If anyone knows where any of this suggested work has already been done, it should be codified and disseminated for us all to study.
    Angelo Campanella

  4. I “expect” that all reasonable media will report on your Porto presentation. All the best with your journeys, Ed.

  5. Good luck with the presentation. Christopher Monckton is also presenting at the same conference re the IPCC and the climate models completely missing the effects of the sun in their climate models.

    I would be interested in having a look at the slides for your presentation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.