by Ed Berry Anthropic’s Claude checked my carbon flow calculations I asked Claude to check my Excel worksheet, which contains all the calculations in my published papers. Here’s what Claude produced in about 20 seconds: I’ll run the audit-xls skill to check this workbook for errors.Read instructionsThe user said “audit this [sheet or workbook]” — […]
Below is a copy of Unbekoming’s article open for your comments. Click this link to read Unbekoming’s original post and its comments: https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/dr-edwin-berry-nature-controls-climate
By Edwin X Berry, PhD, Theoretical Physics, CCM They tell us to “Follow the Science.” What science? This advice itself contradicts the scientific method. Like when Jane brought a puppy to her Kindergarten class, and Nancy asked, “Is it a girl puppy or a boy puppy?” And Johnny replied, “Let’s vote on it!” All
by Ed Berry, PhD On September 7, 2018, I introduced the Climate Equivalence Principle (CEP) at the climate conference in Porto, Portugal. Above is my Slide #10. CEP says that because we cannot distinguish between human and natural-derived carbon atoms or CO2 molecules, they are identical and flow through the carbon cycle at the same rates. CEP
Murry Salby – at Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg, Germany, 10 October 2018 At 24 minutes, Salby notes the C13 level does not track with the CO2 level and is out of phase with the smaller CO2 fluctuations that are dependent of surface temperature.
Maybe the shortest proof that human CO2 does not change the climate. As part of my reply to Glenn Tamblyn’s comment below, here are Sections 3.3 and 6.1 in Berry (2019). 3.3 Physics Model derivation A system describes a subset of nature. A system includes levels and flows between levels. Levels set flows and flows
World’s Simplest Argument that proves human CO2 does not change the climate Meteorologists, scientists explain why there is No Climate Emergency Original by Katie Spence – The Epoch Times, Sep 14, 2023 This post uses and simplifies the part related to Ed Berry. For the whole Epoch Times article, click here. To read my papers
Ed Berry, PhD, Theoretical Physics, CCM Here are seven proofs that human CO2 does not control the CO2 level. My published papers describe these proofs, but this summary may help people understand these proofs. Tell me what you think of these seven proofs in your comments. You may download a PDF of this post here.
A critical debate in climate-change physics IPCC Assumption (1) states that human carbon emissions cause all the increase in CO2 since 1750. CO2 Coalition says Assumption (1) is true. Berry says Assumption (1) is false. See all SCC papers here: Science of climate change Berry (2023) https://doi.org/10.53234/scc202301/21 Andrews (2023) https://doi.org/10.53234/scc202301/20 Andrews (2023a) debate https://scienceofclimatechange.org/wp-content/uploads/Andrews-2023-More-Clear-Thinking-II.pdf Berry
Science of Climate Change is making its publications available at no cost. Here is a full copy that you may read and download. These posts are relevant to this post: The CO2 Coalition Is Wrong Because Its Physics Is Wrong (edberry.com) The Impact Of Human Co2 On Atmospheric Co2 – Summary (edberry.com)
Ed Berry, PhD, Theoretical Physics, CCM Click here to read Ed Berry’s 2023 paper and debate. Copyright (c) 2022 by Edwin X Berry. Permission granted to republish with link to Berry (2021). Download pdf. Introduction Climate change: myth or reality. This summary of Berry (2021) shows the main points without the math. 1. How CO2
by Ed Berry, PhD, Physics On January 22, 2021, Elon Musk tweeted about climate change, “Am awarding $100 M towards a prize for best carbon capture technology.” Elon assumes, as most people do, that the following United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) theories are true: Human carbon dioxide emissions have caused all the
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
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.
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
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
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
By Ed Berry, PhD, Atmospheric Physics, CCM IPCC’s invalid theory Get over it. You are not causing global warming. Those who tell you otherwise are lying to you. Here is new, powerful evidence that the climate alarmists are wrong. They flunk science. They have caused the greatest scam in human history. The United Nations IPCC
Below are the first two sections of the Introduction to my definitive paper on why IPCC’s core hypothesis is invalid. All the math and physics are done, but I am expanding the Introduction because too many people with PhD degrees still get confused. They don’t understand the basics of science because they have little or
