This will not be palatable for some of you... We live on a complex planet that pales in comparison to the infinitely more intricate surrounding universe. Scientific concepts such as string theory and relativity interweave with the known fundamental forces in ways so much larger (and subatomically smaller) than we can currently imagine.

It’s exciting to visualize a future of apex human sustainability, yet passing bills such as S2835 is not an effective way to achieve these goals. An objective reading of the bill leaves the common citizen with more questions than it answers ...

With an anticipated rise in rural populations that will potentially work from home, why are we opposed to building new natural gas power plants, if the future demand is there? Do supporters of this bill understand the environmental impacts of lithium extraction? Are most citizens aware of the Massachusetts climate bureaucrat who was caught advocating for the state to start breaking the will of the citizenry in order to reduce carbon emissions after realizing how fruitless over-regulation has been? Why does the bill call for “justice” and who is rewarded by this “justice” and who is penalized?

The recent article regarding the current reduction in local acid rain measurements went too far by advocating for “big government” when discussing regulations. Reducing acid rain has been an important endeavor, however altering the trajectory of the Earth’s climate is a far more controversial task that many believe is not possible, regardless of our attempts to discard our individual liberty by over-regulating our fellow citizens and compromising the reliability of our current power grid. The idealistic and scientifically incoherent CLCPA was passed in 2019, yet we require further legislation and bureaucratic interference this soon?

We cannot sustain this current agenda of extremist progressivism. We are rapidly starting to trend towards regressivism ...

Eric Geisel, Putnam Station