Ed Berry, PhD, Physics Climate change fanatics incorrectly believe government-paid scientists who advise the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are not influenced by the source of their money. On April 7, 2022, (Daily Inter Lake) Dorothy Bradley (D) and Bob Brown (R), claimed, “The world’s changing climate is the biggest issue.” […]
By Ed Berry, PhD, Physics In March 2022, the Los Angeles Times published an editorial that was 100% misinformation about what it called climate “misinformation.” Climate change alarmism is not based on science. It is based on money, politics, brainwashing, groupthink, and conditioned reflex as Pavlov did with his dogs. Far too many people, including
On Thursday, February 24, I drove from Bigfork to Helena – a 3.5-hour scenic drive each way – to participate in the mediation between me and Montana’s DOR. The mediation took 2 hours. The mediation judge was fair and not partial to DOR. We focused on accounting rules and data. I got everything I asked
Courtesy of Elon Musk, some things we should know to think logically. Fundamental Attribution Error. When someone is late, it’s because they’re lazy. But if you’re late, it was the traffic. Self-Serving Bias. Attributing your successes to your skill and your screw ups to bad luck. In-Group Favoritism. Tendency to favor those in our group over those who are
by Ed Berry, PhD The journal, Science of Climate Change, published my landmark scientific paper on December 14, 2021. My paper, and papers by Murry Salby and Hermann Harde, are checkmate proof that natural CO2, not human CO2, causes most of the increase in atmospheric CO2. Physics proves our CO2 does not change our climate.
David Wojick commented on Ed’s paper on Climate Depot No doubt the IPCC is wrong but there are skeptical climate scientists that do not accept Ed Berry’s argument, including me. In my case it is not the calculations, but the conclusion that is the problem. Given the huge natural CO2 flux it is indeed true
by Joseph Campbell (1904 – 1987) Selections We are all agents in the structuring of other peoples’ lives. Eternity is now. Time is our experience. Later, we will ask: “Who composed this plot?” The adventure matches the readiness of the hero. Follow your bliss and doors will open for you where they would open for
by Bill Gray, Professor Emeritus, Colorado State University (AMS Fellow, Charney Award recipient, and over 50-year member) June 2011, about climate change. Originally posted: On The Hijacking of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) – Watts Up With That? [ I knew Bill Gray well even before I was a Program Manager for the National Science Foundation
The climate change delusion is a real-life rerun of this Twilight Zone story. Do you remember the Twilight Zone story where the distributor of a fortune made the recipients wear grotesque masks until the clock struck midnight? … When they took their masks off, they found their faces became the same as their masks. The
by Edwin X Berry On December 14, 2021, Science of Climate Change published my scientific paper: The impact of human CO2 on atmospheric CO2 – SCC (klimarealistene.com) The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assumes natural CO2 stayed constant at 280 ppm after 1750 and human CO2 dominated the CO2 increase. This paper proves this IPCC
W.A. van Wijngaarden and Will Happer calculated the CO2 climate sensitivity – or the temperature increase when CO2 doubles – is 2.2 K for a fixed relative humidity. This means global warming caused by increased CO2 is insignificant. This shows CO2 does not cause climate change. See the green line in their Figure 4, also
We have two excellent professional papers on climate change to review and compare. The first is by William A. van Wijngaarden and Will Happer. They calculate the CO2 climate sensitivity – the increase in temperature when CO2 doubles – is 2.2 K for a fixed relative humidity. The second is by David Coe, Walter Fabinski,
Monday, September 13, 2021by Dr. Ed Berry The world’s most costly scientific error is the false belief that human CO2 causes all the increase in atmospheric CO2. The truth is that nature causes most of the increase. The truth changes everything they have told you about climate change. My new scientific paper describes this widely promoted scientific
My publication The Impact of human CO2 on atmospheric CO2 – edberry.com supersedes my Preprint #3 below. Download Excel file here. Comments by scientists: Dr. Richard Courtney wrote in his email to global-warming-realists@googlegroups.com on November 21, 2019: Dear Ed, I again provided my 2008 paper as an attachment to an email earlier today. Its conclusion
Chuck Wiese is the best meteorologist I know. Last year, he retired from flying the big jets for Delta Airlines. – Ed by Chuck Wiese, Meteorologist With the continued and terrible politicization of atmospheric science and climate, I thought I would take a look at the true cause of this historic Pacific Northwest heat
“This establishes once and for all, at least as far as Montana law is concerned, climate science is decidedly not settled.” – Attorney Quentin Rhoades Barhaugh v. Montana: Petition for Original Jurisdiction The Petition is based on its claims (highlighted) that human carbon emissions cause bad things to happen. They quote flaming alarmists for their
by Tom V. Segalstad (1998) A number of lifetimes and timescales are being used in both scientific and policy context to describe the behavior of heat-absorbing gases in the atmosphere. These concepts are very important for the discussion on whether anthropogenic CO2 will be accumulated in the atmosphere and exert an additional global “Greenhouse Effect”
People in several USA states and in New Zealand, Australia, Norway, Sweden, Germany, and France have indicated an interest in having a Climate Resolution that will be the foundation of their group’s political actions related to climate change. Therefore, I drafted this resolution for you who wish to make a climate resolution for your group.
by Richard S. Courtney New plot to compare with Figure 1 Compare Richard Courtney’s Figure 1 with the figure below that I (Ed) plotted using IPCC-approved data with monthly resolution with the bonus that the data extend to 2015. The plot shows that Richard Courtney’s Figure 1 is correct. The annual change in the Mauna
