Ed Berry, PhD in Physics with a focus on atmospheric physics. Dr. Berry’s theoretical PhD thesis is recognized as a breakthrough in the science of rain formation and in the use of computer-based numerical models.: Continued human emissions will not increase the 18-ppm human-caused balance level. They will only maintain it. Therefore, there is no cause for alarm. The human-caused 18-ppm would disappear in a few years if human emissions stopped. Nature’s 392-ppm balance level would remain. The Paris Climate Agreement proposed to reduce worldwide human emissions by 28 percent of 18 ppm, or by 5 ppm. The Paris Agreement would not change climate and would not stop natural climate change.
Ed Berry, PhD in Physics with a focus on atmospheric physics. Dr. Berry’s theoretical PhD thesis is recognized as a breakthrough in the science of rain formation and in the use of computer-based numerical models. His model of the microphysics of rain formation is summarized in cloud physics textbooks and taught in university courses. After debating climate alarmists for many years, I have concluded the only way to win a climate debate (note I did not say “convert the believer”) is to clearly negate the alarmist hypothesis. Otherwise, a climate debate can go on for years and accomplish nothing.
Ed Berry, atmospheric physicist: This is a graph showing 10,000 dots representing atmospheric greenhouse gasses. Carbon dioxide from fossil fuels is only 12 dots out of 10,000. How can these 12 dots cause global warming? How can reducing these 12 dots even down to six dots begin to have a significant effect on Earth's climate? Climate Alarmists tell you they can. Most scientists say that reducing these 12 dots representing carbon dioxide from fossil fuels by half or entirely will have negligible effect on Earth's climate. So chose who you think is correct and chose carefully!
Ed Berry, Physicist and Patric Moore, Environmentalist: They both consider that CO2 from human emissions is not causing serious man-made global warming, serious other climate change effects, nor serious rise in ocean levels. In this discussion, they debate which view, logic, reasons are correct for the conclusion that they share about CO2 from human emissions.