Product Description
Global warming skeptics often fall back on the argument that the scientific case for global warming is all model predictions, nothing but simulation; they warn us that we need to wait for real data, "sound science." In A Vast Machine Paul Edwards has news for these skeptics: without models, there are no data. Today, no collection of signals or observations—even from satellites, which can "see" the whole planet with a single instrument—becomes global in time and space without passing through a series of data models. Everything we know about the world's climate we know through models. Edwards offers an engaging and innovative history of how scientists learned to understand the atmosphere—to measure it, trace its past, and model its future.

Edwards argues that all our knowledge about climate change comes from three kinds of computer models: simulation models of weather and climate; reanalysis models, which recreate climate history from historical weather data; and data models, used to combine and adjust measurements from many different sources. Meteorology creates knowledge through an infrastructure (weather stations and other data platforms) that covers the whole world, making global data. This infrastructure generates information so vast in quantity and so diverse in quality and form that it can be understood only by computer analysis—making data global. Edwards describes the science behind the scientific consensus on climate change, arguing that over the years data and models have converged to create a stable, reliable, and trustworthy basis for establishing the reality of global warming. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

meteorologist
A VAST MACHINE is an excellent historical review of meteorology/climatology.However, mathematical treatment of fluid dynamics is very complex. The advent of computers has greatly enhanced weather prediction and analysis, but even today in meteorology five to six days forecasts are at best are only eighty to eighty five percent accurate. Forecasting years ahead, as in climatology are, in my estimation, only educated guesses. We simply don't have a comprehensive enough data base, in climatology, for dependable forecast analysis even with computer models. Although Mr.Edwards presents his case admirably, I am not convinced we are ready to forecast climate with any degree of accuracy now or in the foreseeable future.

Sounds like a reasonable book to me
I have only read chapter one of the book so far (so I gave it a neutral rating), but I was struck by a comment Jerry Matchett made: "... but does claim that computer model output constitutes data!" Considering that lots of climactic and metereological data goes into the models, it seems pretty reasonable to think that the model data coming out has some possible validity and reliability.

As far as language goes, I found chapter one to be very accessible. Check the author's website for more info about the book.

Understand the Roots of Our Understanding
Understanding how we know about climate, and even what it means to know about climate and climate change, is essential if we are to have an informed debate. This is far and away the best book I have read on the infrastructure behind our knowledge of climate change, how that infrastructure developed, and how the infrastructure shapes our understanding.

The story begins in the 1600s as systematic collection of weather data began (at least in the modern period, other cultures such as the Chinese have older records and it would be interesting to unearth these, although the data normalization issues would be extreme). It picks up speed in the 19th C with global trade and then the telegraph. The more data collected, and the more data is exchanged, the more important it becomes to normalize data for comparison. Normalization requires some form of data model, a theory that makes the data meaningful. Indeed, this is Edwards point, all data about weather and climate only becomes meaningful in the context of a model (this is of course generally true).

Work accelerated during WW2 and then exploded in the 50s and 60s as computers became more available. The role played by John Von Neumann in this is fascinating, as is the nugget that his second wife Klara Von Neumann taught early weather scientists how to program (there is a whole hidden history of the role of woman in developing computer programming that needs to be written - or if you know of one please add it to the comments of this review or tweet it to me @StevenForth).

Edwards also introduces some useful concepts such as Data Friction and Computational Friction. I think my company can apply these in its own work, so for me this has been a very practical text.

Modern models of climate are complex and are growing more so. They have to be to integrate data from multiple sources. One of the main lines of evidence for climate change is that data from many different sources are converging to suggest that climate change is a real and accelerating phenomena. One can meaningfully ask if this convergence is an artifact of the models, although this appears unlikely given the diversity of the data and models. But Edwards shows that it is idiotic to claim that the data and the models can be meaningfully separated. This is true in all science and not just climate science. A theory is a model to normalize and integrate data and to uncover and make meaningful relations between disparate data. That these models are now expressed numerically in computations, rather than as differential equations or sentences in a human language or drawings is one of the major shifts of the information age. It will be interesting to dig deeper into the formal relations between these diffferent modeling languages.

Save your money
This book seems little different than the rantings of a Monday morning,arriving late, college professor, suffering from a hangover, who forgot his lecture notes and even his place in the course syllabus, who decides to talk over the heads of his students about anything in general and nothing in particular because he does not know that they will appreciate the difference.

An example, "I intend the notion of knowledge infrastructure to signal parallels with other infrastructures, such as those of communication, transport, and energy distribution. Yet this is no mere analogy or metaphor.It is a precise, literal description of the sociotechnical supports that invariably undergird facts and well-accepted theories."

Imagine 439 pages of this drivel!

He does not realistically appraise evidence regarding "human caused global warming" but does claim that computer model output constitutes data! How MIT could publish this is beyond me! ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (17)

....
It's a book. I got it for a class. I'm not into these books but it seems interesting so far. i came in perfect condition....yeah

Thoughts from a college student
Storm World: Hurricanes, Politics, and the Battle over Global Warming,written by Chris Mooney, is an aggregation of varying perspectives on the connection or lack thereof between global warming and intensifying hurricanes around the world and the fine detail and intricacy of how it's all tied into policy and politicians.Chris Mooney takes the reader on a time travel of hurricane research from 1743 when Benjamin Franklin collectively defined what a storm consists of all the way to current day which is defined by high technology hurricane research (p.15).Along this technology journey scientists have not only discovered amplitude information about hurricanes but also how hurricanes are connected to other meteorological phenomena.Mooney tells of various scientists who have conducted research in attempts to both prove and disprove how global warming is or is not causing an increase in intensity and frequency of hurricanes.
An interesting aspect that Mooney includes in his book is the interconnectedness of the hurricane battle with policy.Research by scientists is funded when the government sees a need for that research to be done.The government sees a need for research when the people are demanding it and citizens demand it when a topic is receiving a lot of media attention.Therefore, the government, and accordint to Mooney particularly the Busch administration, was carefully controlling which aspects of the hurricane-global warming research were released into the media.Also, Mooney gives the example of Landsea who left the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) because they were so controlling of what its scientists could say to the media (p. 134-135).Additionally, where a research institution receives its funds plays a large role in the general reputation it wants to hold on a topic such as global warming.Mooney says the IPCC was funded for a while by the very large oil company, ExxonMobil, and therefore would want to release more anti-hurricane-global warming research.It sends the message that everyone should be very cautious of present biases in the information received because of the number of ways it may be steered to fit the needs of those producing it.
Chris Mooney did a great job providing a variety of perspectives concerning the hurricane-global warming debate, a strategy which strengthens the merit of his book.He made sure to include scientists/researchers, politicians from both ends of the spectrum, the media, and research institutions.He was sure to give research examples from those who support the link between global warming and stronger hurricanes, from those who do not, and those who don't fall strongly either way.Consistently throughout the book he speaks of scientists like Gray who are against a global warming-hurricane link and those like Emanuel, Holland and Knutson who believe in a global warming-hurricane link.At the very end of the book, Mooney lets his opinion shine through his writing by giving examples of stronger research that shows a true link between global warming and hurricanes.
One of my favorite parts of the book is the specific examples and stories of hurricanes that have happened.When a city, people, and personal stories are attached to a hurricane, it becomes more real instead of just wind speeds and pressure measurements.This aspect of the books makes it more relatable to a wide audience.Despite one's political background or one's worldview of the connection between global warming and hurricanes, everyone cares about other people and the devastation they face from a natural disaster like hurricanes.No matter what is causing it, hurricanes cause millions of dollars in damage and affects thousands of lives every year.Mooney definitely sends this underlying message in his book; there is a great need for hurricane research for the better we understand and can predict them, the more prepared we can be for the damage they are capable of producing on land.

Hurricanes and Politics Should Not Mix
Chris Mooney presents a fascinating inside look into the politics and personalities behind hurricane science and scientists.With the possibility that global warming can increase the destructive power of hurricanes, a formerly non-controversial topic became highly politicized in a short amount of time.Predictably, scientists were in two basic camps: one believed global warming makes hurricanes worse, and one believed that global warming (which may not be occurring) does not make hurricanes worse.

Although Mooney keeps the pace moving along, by the time you finish this book, you may know more about hurricanes than you bargained for.At times, the book is almost too detailed for its own good, but if you know at least a little basic meteorology, you should be able to handle all the atmospheric science thrown into the book.Good book on a fascinating subject.

Good, But Not Outstanding
This is a good book, but not quite as good as the other reviewers suggest.I suspect that how much you like this book depends, in part, on how much you agree with the author's views.Put simply, although the book purports to be an objective overview of the interaction between science and politics, Mr. Mooney makes it clear which side he thinks is right.Those skeptical of global warming tend to be marginalized as out of touch, cranks, or biased by "special interests."This detracts from the book in a significant way because it casts doubt on the accuracy of the analysis.Indeed, in several places, the author seems to go out of his way to downplay data that undercuts the "global warming is making hurricanes worse" thesis that he endorses.

Having said that, the book is still very readable and full of information about hurricanes and the history of their study.Whenever the author is not talking about global climate change, his account of the science and the scientists is engaging and clear.

In sum, worth reading if you have any interest in hurricanes, but take his discussions of the state of global warming science with a large grain of salt.

Science and Journalism

This is an exceptionally well done example of scientific journalism.
It presents abalanced review of both sides of the global warming ->
hurricanes issue while recognizing that the consensus of scientific opinion is that global warming is a real phenomenon. ... Read more

Product Description

Global warming’s hidden agenda: a global socialist government 

The worldwide effort to combat manmade global warming is history’s most far-reaching hoax. In The Global-Warming Deception, Grant R. Jeffrey documents the orchestrated campaign of political pressure, flawed science, and falsified data—all designed to sell an environmental lie and bring the West to its knees.

United Nations agencies use the threat of rising ocean levels, crop failure, expanding deserts, and the extinction of species to convince western nations to surrender their sovereignty. As these developments play out, we see the globalists consolidating their power.

In The Global-Warming Deception, you will find proof that:

Your liberty is at stake. Now is the time to learn all you can about the socialist-Marxist elite that is advancing the false threat of global warming—the most deadly deception in history.

Product Description
Significant climate change as a consequence of human pollution of the atmosphere looks increasingly likely. Some change is already occurring but quite what magnitude of change will occur and what it will bring to different parts of the world remains unknown. Meanwhile, despite the catastrophic forecasts of the dangers that a warming world poses to human and other species, the consumer society of the North continues in its energy hungry path, and the peoples of the South continue to bear the cost.In the face of this uncertain yet impending crisis, does it make sense to speak of a moral response? Michael Northcott argues not only that it does, but that it is essential if we are to avoid further environmental disaster.
... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

The Most Complete
This book is the most complete analysis of not only global warming, but the lack of morals involved in the creation of situations that are causing the planet to heat.I've read a lot of literature on the subject of global warming andRev. Northcott covers all of the sub-topics. This is an excellent book and certainly, clergy of all stripes, as well as environmentalists,should be particularly interested in the contents.

A lie, taken to the nth degree
Sparse evidence of anthropogenic global warming is wielded like a bludgeon in an attempt to bend human behavior into a mold more to the author's liking.

Alarmists and self-loathers alike, rejoice! Your book is here.

A pick for both spirituality and social issues collections.
A MORAL CLIMATE: THE ETHICS OF GLOBAL WARMING offers a challenging, different look at global warming trends from a spiritual and ethical perspective, and comes from a leading international ethicist who has written other definitive works on the topic of Christian ethics and environmental thinking. From the failings in dominant economic models to the politics of oil around the world and religious perspectives and insights, this blend of Christian thought and social issues is a pick for both spirituality and social issues collections. ... Read more

Product Description
Global warming: it's one of the hottest scientific and political issues of today. And yet we've all found ourselves asking . . .

- It's freezing outside--where's global warming now?
- Climate is always changing--how do we know this isn't just a cycle?
- Why should Christians care about global warming when we know the world won't end that way?

For all the talk about climate change, there's still a great deal of debate about what it all means, especially among Christians. A CLIMATE FOR CHANGE offers straightforward answers to these questions, without the spin. This book untangles the complex science and tackles many long-held misconceptions about global warming. Authored by a climate scientist and a pastor, A CLIMATE FOR CHANGE boldly explores the role our Christian faith can play in guiding our opinions on this important global issue. (2009) ... Read more

Customer Reviews (18)

An Informative Book about Climate Change
Climate change is happening at the earth's core. It's warming lakes and there are changes in the weather. The thing that stuck out to me is that weather is different than what is happening. Yes there are record colds but it's how much the seasons are changing that is being effected. They use charts, graphs, and other facts. They even debunk the myths that people like Al Gore are trying to prove. They take real life examples and show how things have changed around the world.

It's not about politics. It's about the science of things. Looking back at temperature changes for hundreds of years. I was blown away by the detailed record keeping over the centuries. They wanted the straight facts not all the hot air that is blowing around about this topic. They laid it all out, what causes were happening both by nature and by man. We're causing the most problems.

The main problem with most of it is that it is expensive to change how we live. Yes, recycling does help but that is only one thing that can be done. Yet we are creatures of comfort. I loved the honesty of the authors that laid it all out for you. They even admitted that they didn't agree on everything. Statements throughout the book just made my eyes open even more. I may not understand it all. I am still learning but definitely want to read more on the subject.

The final thing that it left me with is something that I have always felt. I want to take care of the Earth that we do have. Yes there will be a new heaven and a new earth as it is stated in the Bible. I am concerned about what we have now.I also liked the fact that they gave you other sources to understand more of what is happening to our Earth. This is one book that will stick with me for a long time.

If you like Elmer Gantry, you'll luv this "book."
I applaud the energy of the authors and I really hate to rain on the parade but I have to do my best Paul Revere impression on this toxic book.If the system allowed, I would give it a zero rating.

I found this little "gem" in our church library this morning bearing the label "new" and have spent the last two hours reading it.That was about 90 minutes more than this work deserves.I would like to think that the authors mean well, but I also wonder whether or not they have simply sought out and found their niche for making money off a trusting Christian community just as the Elmer Gantry types learned to do 70 years ago.It may not be all their fault because the Christian community in the past 25 years has embraced the commercialization of the faith, and maybe that's standard operating procedure in their environment.But if so, this is a perfect example of why it is a very bad idea and cheapens the faith.

I will be blunt.This volume, in my opinion, is an intellectual, scientific and theological travesty--even if they are correct on the science, and in that I remain a sceptic due to the total lack of credibility of the science community. I am distressed that it found its way into our church library and that anyone would hold him or herself out as a Christian and publish such a lacking epistle intentionally to the Christian community.The authors would do well to read and study Alexander Pope's Essay on Criticism, you know, that one with the line "a little learning is a dangerous thing."

Science has entered a period where it has become two ugly things at once: the grand Inquisitor where Truth is no longer its objective (money and conformity to the thinking of the money source have taken over as the goal) and where it has prostituted itself towards that objective.The search for Truth, Academic integrity and Academic freedom are relics of the past.It is all about money, and you do what it takes.And so, we start with what seems to be a bit of puffery in credentials.A little Google looking leads to the discovery that "Dr." Hayhoe is not a doctor of philosophy at all.Once you know that little fact, you then realize the unusual description of Hayhoe as a "climate scientist" with no mention of earned degrees. The book never states that she has a doctorate but the clear inference is there, and even some prior reviewers (and many news stories) have assumed such. According to Hayhoe's bio, she has a BA in physics and astronomy from University of Toronto and a masters degree in climate science studies from University of Illinois, no doctorate, and her position at Texas Tech is a "research associate professor", not the expert.The book itself has a bibliography of 38 pages, with a high percentage being web articles, and cites to only two of her own works, one a web-site URL on page 185 which appears to be a short report about climate in Chicago but the report is no longer available, the other on page 189, seemingly a similar report about California that looks to be five pages long. Hayhoe does get a lot of publicity but it does not seem she is in the category of a renowned leading expert.

There in fact are many real PhD climatologists around the world who would disagree with most of the "science" she claims to describe, but you would never know from the volume that any such real scientists even exist, except perhaps in her repetitively opaque (but less than scientific) argument that "some would deny....but...."I do not find that to be an acceptable way to dismiss the opposition--at least have the guts to put a name to your Goliath and then take your best shot, but don't put the burden on the reader to say "Well, what about Prof So-And-So who thinks you're nuts."

In that regard, Hayhoe claims over and over that the data is known and settled, yet the fact is that many of her scientific comrades were caught last year with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar of destroying and hiding data upon which their hypotheses rest, over a period of many years, claiming at the time that no back up data was preserved.Is Hayhoe claiming that she has a spare copy of the missing data?I doubt it, but she makes her claims nonetheless.

Overall, as a description of the science and the issues, this book is exceedingly misleading as a supposedly fair presentation of the facts and issues.I found it incredible and sorely deficient that not one footnote is found in the entire book. The reader is at a loss to evaluate the claims other than by faith--they look so nice in their pictures, so it must be true--or at best the reader can go to the bibliography and guess what was relied upon.As for the issue of cause even in a period of warming, exceedingly simplistic discussion is provided considering that well respected real climatologists disagree strongly with the premise.

The sophistication of writing and argument is not of high standard. Example:she starts with the anecdotal tear-jerker of the story of the Eskimo village of Kivalina. Fast forward to pages 19-20 and figure 7 re the Medieval Warming Period and what does she do but dismiss this rather dramatic climate period that first allowed colonization and when ended drove the Vikings out of Greenland and Labrador as a mere anecdotal event "only relevant to one particular region of the globe." I kid you not.

A few more obvious examples of the deficiency of the science arguments:

Hayhoe hides what would be the most easily understood evidence of the actual temperatures at relevant periods--her graphs and charts never use actual temperatures. And, at page 145-146 she actually glosses over the very substantial risk of poisoning little children from the mercury contamination of the pretzel fluorescent bulbs that are to be used to replace the incandescent ones, arguing that the risk is no more than found in a mercury thermometer.Most homes have no mercury thermometer at all any more since technology has made them obsolete, but they have dozens of light bulbs. Perhaps she just doesn't realize that in essence she is saying that the sacrifice of a few kids a year is a price she is willing to pay to get rid of the tradional light bulb.She also cites, at page 84, to hurricane Katrina in her discussion of enhanced storm strengths--this is totally irresponsible, and I don't get it.Katrina was a Cat 3 storm that took aim at a state with an unqualified governor and a more unqualified mayor.QED.

The authors also should have disclosed in the book the degree, if any, to which Hayhoe profits from the "scientific" views she espouses in this volume, both in her Texas Tech position and her private company (perhaps being paid to write papers that support the views of the grant issuers) considering from the description of her position at the university that her main endeavors relate to spreading the world according to Al Gore.The adage to Follow The Money applies.The question is rightfully asked.If the funding for her job comes from those who are content with and expect her to actively advocate her views, then the readers are entitled to know that.

I was particularly offended by Hayhoe's Canadian whack at "stupid" Americans.She is a Canadian transplant, as am I, and I spotted her Canadianism on page 56 where she lectures the reader on the difference between weather and climate. To understand the slight, you need to know that there is a goodly sized segment of Canadians who will belittle Americans at any and every opportunity. She tells the same apocryphal story I heard 30 years ago of the dumb Americans who arrive in Canada in July with snow skis strapped to their cars, but in all my many years in Canada I never saw or spoke to any Canadian who actually saw such happen, and I don't believe it for a nanosecond. Canadians have told this story for so long that they mayactually begin to believe it, and so it is possible that she believes it--but I don't and so, to me, on this alone her credibility grade goes to zero.

As for theological orthodoxy in caring for the down trodden, the book (I assume unintentionally, and out of ignorance) comes up woefully short as well.The authors seem content to relegate much of the world to perpetual poverty and misery for such is the inevitable result of the "solutions" of the environmental movement that they espouse.Likewise, they have no problem with the inherently racist policies of the movement pertaining to oil drilling--it's fine where the brown peoples live, but not good for the USA, page 153.Not very Christian.

I consider myself an avid environmentalist. I start with picking up the trash along our road. I would do many things differently if I held the power but they would be done with eyes open and with demand of integrity in the scientific community, and I would not play upon the goodwill of my Christian brethren.

All in all, I cringe at the thought that many church libraries will perpetuate this work that I think should be relegated to the ash heap.

Intellegent Data for Anyone
I've been interested in the climate change argument I've been digesting both sides of the debate for quite some time, and the authors provide a fresh perspective in this work. While a faith-based perspective is at the forefront of the book, it is really based on solid logic and scientific arguments that transcend much of the mainstream news. I believe it is a must-read for anyone wanting to see evidence of climate change from a balanced perspective.

Very clear, easily read, excellent documentation
A Climate for Change is a clearly written, engaging read, with a straightforward presentation of the facts behind today's concerns about global warming and the "positive feedback loops" that are exacerbating the effects of human actions.Written from the perspective of thoughtful Christians, the book challenges all to reflect on what would be loving Christian responses to the impacts of global warming, which will fall most heavily on those least able to move or adapt to its changes.The science data presented is very clear.There are colorful inserts that clearly depict the changing trends the world is experiencing.While respectful of the different responses that people of conviction may make, the authors suggest that, individually, we each will make choices, and those choices will have consequences.They encourage truly keeping God at our center, and choosing to do that which will honor God and best respect God's handiwork.

Very good book!
Book was very informative. Was surprised at the amount of scientific evidence mixed with spiritual uplifting in clearing the air on global warming! ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (2)

A Short Easy Read
This was an interesting, and easy to read small book that highlights some of the issues surrounding Gullible Warming and why there is no problem.

The Title Says it All
In one of the more delightful innovations in book publishing, Encounter books is now presenting a series of "broadsides," pamphlets with the look and feel of 18th century political tracts but addressing modern issues.As someone who spent a considerable portion of his life reading 18th century tracts, I appreciate the effort.Eighteenth century title pages differ from modern ones in that they tend to lay out the contents of the whole book, and this Encounter piece is no different.Prominent research scientist and climate expert Roy Spencer essentially divides this book into two parts; one dealing with the bad policy of climate "science" and the other dealing with the "science" itself.

Spencer rightly, in my mind, devotes more time to the policy side of the debate.The "science" portion has already been pretty much completely discredited by the release of the East Anglia CRU emails and code.Nonetheless, Spencer does sift through some of the "conclusions" found in the IPCC reports for lay readers who may still think that these documents actually are mere summaries of the current research.He notes (correctly) that the editors of the IPCC reports are for the most part politicians, bureaucrats and a few activist scientists who tend to "extrapolate well beyond what the science can actually support."(p.19)He also dissects the claim that carbon dioxide is the only "known" source of the recent warming by noting that, for the most part, other solutions to warming and cooling episodes simply have not been studied, most notably cloud cover. In part, this is due to the lack of resources, until recently, to make such a study.The bottom line is that the science is far more equivocable than most politicans imply when they discuss the need to control climate change.

And it is the solutions these politicians support that truly merits critical attention. Spencer examines both the cap and trade proposals and the carbon tax proposal and finds each wanting, though he correctly notes that the former is far more destructive to the economy than the latter.He brings up a point seldom recognized by those who pretend we can legislate technological advances into existance.One of the first things that companies cut when they face difficult economic times is research and development.So carbon caps, far from promoting technological change, will likely hinder it.And of course in some areas, significant change is unlikely in any event.Solar power tries to capture the diffuse energy from the sun, as opposed to using the concentrated solar energy found in fossil fuels.But solar energy as such simply cannot provide the power we need.Nuclear power can, but here the problem is government regulations, not free markets, that are hindering the development of a relatively carbon free power source.The Obama administration is doing little to change this situation.

In the final analysis, this little book does what any broadside should do.It summarizes the issues quickly and accurately for a lay audience.Those who want to learn more about the subject should look to Spencer's more detailed book, Climate Confusion but in this pamphlet you will find far more useful information than you are likely to get in a year's worth of articles in the NY or LA Times.A very worthwhile read. ... Read more

Product Description
Global warming has surfaced as the political issue of the nineties. Most of the world's climate scientists concur that global warming has become an undeniable reality, over 60% of Americans believe that it is something to worry about, and more than 70% think that the United States should take a leading role in combating this challenge to the environment. Yet the United States Government remains reluctant to take the steps necessary to begin treating this devastating environmental problem.

Written by the world's leading scientists and energy analysts, and commissioned by Greenpeace as a shadow document to the finding of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Global Warming: The Greenpeace Report presents the most authoritative, accessible, and up-to-date report on the subject. The study provides clear, straight-forward explanations of what global warming is, and how the greenhouse effect works.

The contributors--Steven Schneider, David Schimmell, George Woodwell, Amory Lovins, Carlo LaPorta, and Michael Walsh among them--explain the scientific data, assess its implications, and outline the policies that governments must implement in order to escape what could be the most serious threat our planet has ever faced. They address the ecological trauma, human health problems, and physical devastation resulting from global warming, and also demonstrate how we can cut greenhouse emissions without significantly altering the American lifestyle. Unlike other studies on the subject, the Report advocates policies that are consistent with the scientist's warnings.

Describing the environmental imperatives and changes crucial to ending the greenhouse threat, Global Warming: The Greenpeace Report will be essential reading for policy-makers; teachers and students of environmental studies, political science, and government; and anyone who is concerned about the future of our planet. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

essential history of a key issue of our time
This book offers a rare insight into the behind-the-scenes players in the international battle over global warming. The players include politicians and media figures, but the most absorbing interplay is between environmentalists and oil company hired guns.This is a valuable regardless of your view of the underlying debate.If, however, you believe that people are causing climate change, you will want this book to remember the names of the companies and people who are uniquely responsible for the problem.

biased and out of date
This book casts as scientific fact that which is merely theory - and highly dubious theory at that. Its contribution to the debate over climate change is highly questionable and it is probable that its main purpose isto advertise the ill-founded claims of Greenpeace that the world is aboutto come to an end. Furthermore, it is now considerably out of date, as muchnew scientific evidence has come to light which makes the contentions inthis book of little merit other than as a historic example of an attempt topervert the course of science in the interests of creating anti-capitalistregulations. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (5)

Probably better for advanced readers
The author focuses on the intersection between politics and science.He covers both areas well; the politics is interesting and the science is accurate, if my understanding of the subject is correct.

I originally wrote a review that criticized the book for favoring one solution, a solution I consider to be futile, over all the others.After an exchange of comments with the author, I concluded that the problem was only that I hadn't understood the text.Perhaps his intent was to collate all the strengths and weaknesses of the various solutions available.I can imagine that any study like that would contain any number of internal counter-arguments that might appear to be contradictions.Even after dialoging with him I still am unclear what his intent was.It could be that my intellect does not grasp the nuances of the manuscript.

I think a reader would gain some good information.I don't think he would come away with a clear road map of how to solve this important problem.

So I think the book is an interesting read, but only one of many.If you're trying to choose from among the spate of books on this subject, I'd recommend either Whole Earth Discipline by Stewart Brand or Storms of My Grandchildren by James Hansen.

A refreshing new approach to a tired problem
Starting on this page Amazon lists 38 books about climate change.Five of these, (3 of which were written by scientists), support the hypothesis of carbon dioxide induced global warming.Thirty one, (17 of which were written by scientists), are skeptical of that hypothesis and present several alternative viewpoints.There certainly is no consensus nor "settled science" here.After twenty years the orthodoxy remains the same, one knob controls the whole immensely complex system known as climate.Occam smiles at his razor. Common sense weeps.Billions of research dollars have been spent on building a monument, a virtual Tower of Babel clad in silicon and engraved with fallible algorithms.After all of this time and money,we have only the elegance of our ideas and astonishing tools to show for it.Meanwhile heresies have spread; atheists are speaking louder, and an audience of agnostics grows.

Mike Hulme broke the climate war monotony last year when his book," Why We Disagree About Climate Change", did not try to convince anyone of the rightness of any argument but instead examined the unique human psychologys behind all of it.Nordhaus and Shellenberger in "Environment 360" argued that efforts to use climate science to justify decarbonization should cease and a divorce arranged.Roger Pielke Jr. walks farther down this road examining the issue from a sociological and political standpoint.That is key.We who have been arguing the science for twenty years need to listen when Pielke says this is really a political issue not a scientific one.Forget arguing about the science.Nothing will be settled until some hypothesis is confirmed by empirical confirmation in the real world and that is not likely to happen.Meanwhile the climate science budget would be better spent on observational science examining regional climate.We know regional climate exists; that it directly affects mankind and vice versa in several ways. It is time to leave the virtual world where the arctic and the desserts share the same climate and return to reality.

Reality is what politics is all about.Pielke convincingly illustrates the coming reality of enormous energy demand emanating from increasing living standards and increasing population.We either cross our fingers and let the cards fall as they may (with all the risks that entails) or we get governments involved in an overall planning posture. He builds his political solution on two solid pillars.First man-made carbon dioxide in the air is not a good thing says a huge segment of the population.Whether this is true or not is beside the point; It has become axiomatic and there is widespread support for action to limit it.But that support disappears when it runs into Pielke's iron law of climate policy which is that there is a "deeply held global and ideological commitment to economic growth" that trumps any climate program.These undeniable facts need to be reconciled.

Getting climate science out of the picture is important if the atheists and heretics are to remain calm.Going after carbon dioxide is what matters most to the orthodox; they won't miss the science.Is there a way to limit carbon dioxide in the atmosphere without it being part of a costly climate program?Can it be done without competing with economic growth?The answer is not to be found in science or in some ideological commitment.It is found in good politics.Pielke saves the how and the best for the last chapter and I will not spoil your suspense by describing it here.The book is well written and fun to read as he takes you on several interesting and enlightening side journeys.It is a climate book far different from the same old routine.The logic is impeccable and Pielke does not scream like his critics which means that politicians will probably never get behind his ideas.

no energy breakthrough = no decarbonization progress
For three decades, I had a ringside seat to some of the events in the book.As a young post-doc at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in 1982, I recall a seminar in which we were shown a plot of average global temperature for the past century, and then a modeling effort that included various combinations of three forcings: volcanic aerosols, solar variability and rising CO2 concentration.Good agreement with the rising trend of temperature was obtained only with the inclusion of CO2 (and presumably the feedback processes in the model).We were invited to conclude that the model was pretty good, and that the forecast for the future increase of temperaturewas credible.

Fast forward to 2010.We can now read a widely publicized article in the Journal of Climate titled "Why Hasn't Earth Warmed as Much as Expected?" written by top-notch atmospheric scientists(look for the Brookhaven National Lab press release).The article is premised on the conclusion that the Earth hasn't warmed as much as expected, and asks why.Recent data and analysis now discount a global-warming "time-bomb", ascenario by which the global temperature lags behind the equilibrium value for the current concentration of carbon dioxide, because of the large heat capacity of the oceans. The "time-bomb" provides a nice exercise in ordinary differential equations, an exercise that I have taught in class.If CO2 is frozen at the current value, a further doubling of global temperature increase could still occur, if the time-bomb parameters are stretched to the upper bound.But in light of recent data and analysis, the actual time-bomb scenario for Earth appears closer to the lower bound.So at least two other possible answers to the posed question invite reconsideration.One possible answer is that positive feedback processes in the prognostic models are too large, a second possible answer is that anthropogenic haze could be offsetting the enhanced greenhouse effect.Both of those answers are in fact allowed by IPCC-endorsed science, as is the possibility that thenet anthropogenic effect has actually been close to zero, and thus global temperature change observed in the last century was largely a natural fluctuation, driven by mechanisms unappreciated back in 1982.All this uncertainty about what has been happening in the past century contributes to uncertainty about what will happen in the next, and, as Pielke points out, research in the coming decade is likely to reveal more uncertainly, not less.

Now on to Pielke's book. In writing my above paragraphs, highlighting the state of the science the way I did, I have positioned myself as a borderline "skeptic" within my academic community.I would go over the borderline if I characterize as ludicrous Al Gore's statement that "We have at our fingertips all of the tools we need to solve three of four climatecrises - and we only need to solve one" and go on to characterize our Senator Inhofe's statement thatthe threat of catastrophic global warming is the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people" as entirely reasonable, given the energy and development advocacy that his detractors use global warming science for.At that point I would be in trouble with a crowd of advocates that doesn't really know how the Kyoto treaty works (doesn't know who receives the penalty fines), doesn't know that a capacity factor of at most 30% needs to be figured into a news story about a wind farm and its cost,and is clueless about the watts per square of meter of photosynthesis in agriculture. The academic zeitgeist is that the iconic Socolow "wedges" would happen if the naysayers would just stop detracting from the public will to mitigate global warming.The crowd's lack of understanding of energy technology leaves them oblivious to Pielke's iron law of climate policy(contemporary economic well-being trumps global warming mitigation at all times and at all places, regardless of the extent of thepublic's acceptance of the "majority view" about global warming) so the advocates mistakenly engage in a "vicious battle with those who express minority views about climate science" (page 44). And more on page 44: "Further, efforts to intensify public opinion could indeed have the opposite effect if they are perceived to be misrepresenting the scientific and policy arguments for action.In fact, as I will show in Chapter 7, that is exactly what has happened."

After reading page 44, an eager reader, if already savvy about renewable energy (on the level of Mackay's book, rather than Gore's) and the science-fiction geoengineering ideas (such as adding aerosols to the stratosphere), may then want to go straight toChapter 6 an page 143 titled "How Climate Policy Went Off Course and the First Steps Back in the Right Direction" (it doesn't blame the skeptics). Chapter 7: "Disasters, Death and Destruction".(For that chapter, I not only had a ringside seat but also occasionally jumped into the ring to give a couple of whacks).A title of a subsection is "Untangling a Decade of Misrepresentation of Disasters and Climate Change"(the malfeasance did not originate from the deniers).And Chapter 8:"The Politicization of Climate Science" (with recent headlines of Climategate, IPCC scandals, Copenhagen breakdowns and vindication of hurricane skeptics,Senator Inhofe is no longer noteworthy).Pielke hits three home runs with these chapters.Pielke is thorough in his research and his outstanding quotes all have citations. Here is one of my favorites, a segment of a quote from Sarewitz on page 212: "Value disputes that are hidden behind the scientific claims and counterclaims need to be flushed out and brought into the sunlight of democratic deliberation".

When public presentations of climate science willfully conflated bad science with the good science, the silence in my scientific community was indeed noteworthy,as if all could be forgiven if the conflation helped focus the public on properly rearranging their values.But nowadays, thanks to books like Pielke's, it is bit easier for members in my community to claim that they were skeptics all along too,and even to claim that they were speaking out, but just doing so softly so as not to jeopardize (or appear jealous of) funding streams, or inadvertently to be abetting conservative causes.Roger Pielke Jr. has a long record of wisdom and integrity on climate and energy issues, and deserves the accolades for his book.

On page 50 we read 'Similarly, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) promised that "any kind of cap-and-trade system that comes forward will not raise energy and gas prices." ' Of course, given the iron law,Congress will only be able to enact such token gestures.Without a breaktrough in energy technology (say in photovoltaics or advanced nuclear fuel cycles), decarbonization policies can expected to do nothing more then nudge a gentle shift away from coal to natural gas for electricity generation, in regions that have a plentiful and secure natural gas supply.In his final chapter Pielke argues for a modest carbon tax, and then mustering the political will to keep the revenue stream targeted at energy R&D.

A masterful analysis
Pielke is a expert on science policy from the University of Colorado. He runs a popular and often controversial blog. He should not be confused with his father, with the same name, who is an important climate scientist.

Pielke's style is soft spoken but he is not afraid to make strong judgements. He proposes an "iron law of climate policy" that basically says that no climate policies that cause substantial, immediate economic pain will ever be implemented. If you accept his iron law (and I do) then it is clear that all the CO2 control efforts that are supposed to be implemented via cap and trade or other unpleasant government mandates or taxes will never see the light of day. Yet Pielke believes that CO2 control is important and he proposes solutions that don't violate his iron law.

The book is filled with well-presented useful information. His discussion of climategate, the publication of numerous private emails exchanged between important climate scientists, is the best I've ever seen.

Pielke's strength is illuminating politicized debates with facts and logical analysis. Obviously climate or global warming is one of those. Because he grew up in the important climate science community centered in Colorado and started his career in science, he knows many of the important players personally.

A Thoughtful Approach to the Next Round of Climate Policy
(This reviews the pre-release version.)

After a tumultuous year in climate policy - from Climategate to the failure of the Copenhagen talks and the probable death of cap-and-trade - Pielke's book offers the most thoughtful approach to climate policy, taking honest stock of both the current state of science and politics. It is excellent for those who are familiar with the debate as well as those new to the issue.
Pielke is one of the few experts willing to critique those he agrees with, and he spends a fair amount of time highlighting the politicization of climate science by both sides. While arguing that climate change presents real risks, he is effective at noting the unscientific excesses of advocates of aggressive climate policy. Several anecdotes tell the story of how noted scientists used their credentials to make claims they admit are unscientific. These exaggerations, Pielke argues, have increased public skepticism about the science, making it more difficult to come to policy agreement.
The book does an excellent job explaining the basics of climate science, offering some good guidelines for what is known and where the scientific uncertainty lies. It is one of the few books I've read recently that offers both clear explanations and the complexity involved in understanding climate science. Most effective is the way he uses this solid scientific foundation to characterize the size and nature of the challenge of reducing carbon emissions. Perhaps the best insight, however, is that while many who debate climate policy focus on debating the details of climate science, Pielke argues an effective policy approach can be found even without certainty regarding the exact nature of the risks from climate change.
Finally, he argues for a technology-centered approach to decarbonizing. He also keeps in mind something that sometimes gets lost in the traditional climate debate -- the dignity of humans that obliges us to respect individual choice and help those in poverty improve their lives. Although I am not as confident that political leaders can determine how to effectively or fairly invest in technology solutions as Pielke, this is a narrow area of debate. For those trying to understand what is next for climate policy, "The Climate Fix" is simply a must read.
... Read more

Product Description
Although the world's climate has undergone many cyclical changes, the phrase 'climate change' has taken on a sinister meaning, implying catastrophe for humanity, ecology and the environment. We are told that we are responsible for this threat, and that we should act immediately to prevent it. But the apparent scientific consensus over the causes and effects of climate change is not what it appears. "Chill" is a critical survey of the subject by a committed environmentalist and scientist. Based on extensive research, it reveals a disturbing collusion of interests responsible for creating a distorted understanding of changes in global climate. Scientific institutions, basing their work on critically flawed computer simulations and models, have gained influence and funding. In return they have allowed themselves to be directed by the needs of politicians and lobbyists for simple answers, slogans and targets. The resulting policy - a 60 percent reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050 - would have a huge, almost unimaginable, impact upon landscape, community and biodiversity.On the basis of his studies of satellite data, cloud cover, ocean and solar cycles, Peter Taylor concludes that the main driver of recent global warming has been an unprecedented combination of natural events. His investigations indicate that the current threat facing humanity is a period of cooling, as the cycle turns, comparable in severity to the Little Ice Age of 1400-1700 AD. The risks of such cooling are potentially greater than global warming and on a more immediate time scale, with the possibility of failing harvests leaving hundreds of millions vulnerable to famine. Drawing on his experience of energy policy and sustainability, Taylor suggests practical steps that should be taken now. He urges a shift away from mistaken policies that attempt to avert inevitable natural changes, to an adaptation to a climate that may turn significantly cooler. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (6)

Stimulating study of climate change

Ecologist and scientist Peter Taylor has written an extraordinary book on climate change. It is also full of stimulating thoughts on energy, land use, biodiversity, housing, food production, migration, etc.

The warm years 1980-2005 followed the cool years 1950-80, in a natural cycle. He contends that these unusually warm years gave rise to the theory of unstoppable global warming.

He notes, "Most of the sea-level rise to date (and all other environmental effects laid at the door of `global warming', such as the retreat of glaciers and calving ice shelves), can be accounted for by the rebound from the Little Ice Age. Indeed, the trend in sea-level rise from 1800 has been consistent, and in the last ten years, as the oceans have cooled, that trend has levelled off."

He studies satellite data, cloud cover, and ocean and solar cycles. Satellite data, particularly since 2005, has told us much that is new about the climate. Solar magnetic cycles drive cloud changes, which drive ocean temperatures. More sunlight means less cloud, warming the oceans. Cloud cover decreased 1980-2000. The consequent sunlight rise of 6 watts per square metre lifted temperatures by 0.60C, far more than the 0.8 watt rise due to carbon dioxide.

Cloud cover increased again after 2000, reducing sunlight by 2 watts per square metre. 2007 saw a sharp fall in the global surface temperature. The solar cycles are in decline, so we are more likely to face cooling.

The Arctic has heatwaves every 70 years; the previous one was in 1920-40. Another, in 2000-07, caused rapid ice loss there. But the record 2007 summer ice-melt was not repeated in 2008 (ice cover rose 30 per cent in October 2008, compared to 2007). 2007 saw record ice extent in Antarctica, in the poles' usual see-saw.

Taylor opposes our present market-driven energy policy. He proposes, "I make the startling conclusion that now is not the time to expand renewable energy supplies. A precautionary, no-regrets strategy would put all available funding into reducing consumer demand, better housing regulations and design, urban and industrial planning, heat distribution, small-scale CHP [Combined Heat and Power], micro-CHP in homes, and PV [photovoltaic] roofing."

He notes, "If all new housing were built to Scandinavian standards of energy efficiency, making use of passive solar technology, heat pumps, micro-CHP and PVroofs - there could be a net supply rather than demand from the growth in that sector."

He writes, "cities need to study the Cuban example of an economy that had to manage without cheap fossil fuel and fertilizer and yet developed effective educational and health programmes and an efficient organic agriculture." He urges us to promote cooperation and community, not competition.

Chill: A necessary expose
Taylor's central thesis is that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) process stifles informed dissent in favor of a false unanimity on global warming intended to support political and economic action. He supports this view by lucidly outlining the climate science evidence on which there is no consensus.

In his review of Taylor's book, Alister MacIntosh suggests we ignore Taylor's views because they contravene scientific consensus.On the contrary, Taylor chronicles and exemplifies the absence of consensus among climate scientists.This is as it should be in any scientific discipline, particularly one as immature as climate science.A healthy scientific process absolutely thrives on dissenting evidence to arrive at ever-better (i.e. more predictive) hypotheses.That is how a scientific discipline grows and eventually matures.

MacIntosh proposes Taylor is an unquallified messenger we should ignore in favor of an "authority" like the IPCC.Had science followed MacIntosh's advice historically, the earth would still be flat, the center of the universe, and devoid of evolution.Science based on authority, as MacIntosh implicitly advocates, is dogma; science based on evaluation of all relevant evidence, as Taylor urges explicitly and by example, is the essence of the scientific method.

Why are global warming believers like MacIntosh and many "greens" so fearful of dissenting viewpoints?I helped author the Kyoto Protocol yet treasure Taylor's carefully marshaled and reasoned evidence precisely because it provides the opportunity for advancing climate science. If there is an effective rejoinder to Taylor's contrarian climate views, the views of the greens will be correspondingly strengthened; and if not, Taylor gives the opening to modify positions to better reflect the evidence.Isn't that the aim?

If global warming is real and anthropogenic, global action is certainly justified, and that will be supported when genuine consensus emerges.In the meantime, stifling dissent, ignoring contrary evidence, and attacking the messenger, reflect the absence of consensus and cannot lead to effective and enduring change.Scientific dissent is to be treasured precisely because it is the foundation of paradigm shifts essential to effective and lasting political action.

Disclosure: Taylor is an old and dear friend.Precisely for that reason, however, I know him well, respect his astonishing breadth, and honor his eclectic process. Irrespective of your position on climate change, we should all thank Taylor for his courage, time and the intellectual effort he has invested to help us all toward a more informed position.Read this important book and decide for yourself.

Yes, but what are Taylor's credentials?
This book is well written, it raises important questions about climate science, and I very much agree with most of the author's conclusions about the need to focus primarily on building human resilience to face the future. As such it would be churlish, just because I am going to question his standpoint, not to give it 4 stars. Let me also say that I do have a lot of respect for this writer's writing on wild land and wildlife - for example, his book Beyond Conservation: A Wildland Strategy.

My problem is with how Taylor arrives at his thesis. It is the same problem that I have with climate change contrarians in general - the question of epistemology - namely, what we think it is that we know, and how we think we know it. Much of what Taylor says in this book is an attack on mainstream scientific epistemology. But what of his epistemology?

Taylor's bottom line is that "Man-made global warming is exactly what it says on the label - a fabrication! It is an illusion borne of a particular way of looking at the world" (p. 360). His Amazon product description surmises that "investigations indicate that the current threat facing humanity is a period of cooling, as the cycle turns, comparable in severity to the Little Ice Age of 1400-1700 AD." On this basis, confusing weather with climate, he told the Daily Express (6 Jan 2010), to which he is a "climate scientist" or "analyst", that the current hard winter in the UK is a harbinger of things to come.

My question is, "Who is Peter Taylor to tell us such things?" Climate science is of a complexity that demands an interdisciplinary team approach of experts who have proven themselves through rigorous peer review. Peer review means that your stuff can stand up to scrutiny with the best corresponding minds around. That is what good science does and what science culminates in the consensus of expert panels such as those behind reports of the IPCC, the Royal Society, the Hadley Centre and the UK Met Office.

I have noticed with all climate change contrarians that their arguments seem superficially persuasive ... but usually only until matched to the other side of the story. For example, Taylor's view on the role that he thinks is played by solar cycles is ostensibly persuasive. But enquire what the UK Met Office thinks of this theory, and its web site last year dismissed it as "Myth No. 1". So, if we are non-climate-change scientists, to whom do we listen? To such likes as Taylor, or to experts with an acclaimed and current credibly published track record in the field?

It would be different if Taylor was drawing most of his material from panels that represent scientific consensus. But most climate change contrarians are not so doing. There are, of course, some contrarian panels, but so far not with anything like the same credibility as mainstream scientific institutions.

Taylor reveals where he is coming from in his approach to science in an autobiographical self-published book, Shiva's Rainbow (2006) (also reviewed by this reviewer). Much of it concerns his belief that he could augment his campaigning work by occult means. He concludes that plutonium might change the world positively because of the homeopathic effects of its astrological properties. I have also reviewed it on this site giving chapter and verse. A key passage is where he says of his time with Greenpeace:

"In truth, in the scientific realms in which I worked, and gained by now, some standing, I was an imposter. I am not a scientist. Apart from my brief survey of tree-hole communities when I successfully correlated insect larvae diversity with circumference and aspect of the hole to the sun, which, in any case, had been done many times before, I have never `done' science. In my work I have relied certainly upon an understanding of scientific theory and a memory for facts and relationships, and upon an instinct for the hidden and not yet known, but fundamentally I have been a linguist and an actor. My scientific degrees were linguistic exercises in critical review. My performances on television, in public inquiries, on tribunals and commissions, those of an extremely well-briefed lawyer, the ultimate actor. Which is not to say there is no dedication to truth" (pp. 146-7).

One example from Chill that shows how easy it can be to fall into pseudoscience is his approach to what he sees as global cooling. There is nothing surprising in the theory that the Earth is slowly heading towards another "little ice age". What is surprising is that Taylor advances his version of the thesis without making reference to the peer-reviewed work by William F. Ruddiman, for example, in his book, Plows, Plagues, and Petroleum: How Humans Took Control of Climate (Princeton University Press, 2005, and I see he has another one out this month).

Ruddiman is a distinguished palaeoclimatologist and Professor Emeritus at the University of Virginia. He writes: "As I see it, nature would have cooled the Earth's climate, but our ancestors kept it warm by discovering agriculture..." This is because agriculture, and now industrialization, raise the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. He goes on to say that some people might see this as grounds for complacency about present-day climate change, but "others might counter that if so few humans with relatively primitive technologies were able to alter the course of climate so significantly, then we have reason to be concerned about the current rise of greenhouse gases to unparalleled concentrations at unprecedented rates ("How did Humans first alter Global Climate", Scientific American, 292:3, March 2005, 46-53).

Taylor published "Chill" not from a publishing house with a relevant scientific reputation but from, Clairview. This grew out of the Rudolph Steiner movement and its backlist includes books cognate with Taylor's concern with such notions as "psychic espionage". A recent article, presenting the appearance of being a scientific paper, was published by him in the New Age journal, Caduceus, alongside material on 2012 Hopi prophesies. Is that a problem? Not if there's also the peer-reviewed publishing to back it up, but where is it in Taylor's case in the highly scientific field of climate change?

Post Copenhagen a lot of people have decided to cancel climate change. It is an inconvenient truth, better relegated to the dustbin of untruths. Taylor cut his teeth on toxic dumping issues. "Chill", read in the context of "Shiva's Rainbow", arguably serves to keep open the dumpsite of denial.

a balanced view
Having read many of the Documents for "Policy Makers" from the IPCC it is refreshing to get an insight into the "Working Papers", which present a much more scientific view of the climate situation - that there are those who disagree with it just being CO2 that is causing warming and cooling. That is: the "concesus" talked about in the press is not what it is in the IPCC Working Groups.

Peter Taylor has good qualifications for his work; this is not an "easy read" but an depth probe into the latest research.

It should be read by all Policy Makers - and especially those directly involved with making decisions about the future.

Rob Pattison
MA Oxon, PGCE Cantab.

A DefinitiveReport on AGW Science
Peter Taylor has written two books in one - the first on the science and the second on the politics of changing Global Climate. I found his coverage of the science, the first 'Book', to be definitive - comprehensive, well considered, well written, readableand well supported by references to published papers.He leaves little ground for confidence in the IPCC's conclusions.

In the second 'Book' on the political activities of the various protagonists - the scientific establishment, governments both national and regional, NGO's and the media his background in the environmental movement rather dominates and is given afreer rein.He castigates the lot of them. It is a very interesting read, saved from a rant by his putting forward a suggested and considered way through the chaos.

Altogether a book I certainly recommend to anyone wanting to know more about the science behind climate change and/or concerned about the current path AGW proponents are taking. ... Read more

Product Description
Global warming and climate change are growing environmental concerns. The potential impact on freshwater and marine fish is immense, because most fish have no physiological ability to regulate their body temperature. This volume focuses on the effects of temperature at all levels of organization in fish, with particular emphasis on physiological function: cells, epithelia, organ systems, the whole organism, reproduction, behavior, pollutant interactions, ecology and population dynamics. Written by experts in the field, many chapters also speculate on the long-term physiological and ecological implications to fish of a 2-4oC global warming scenario over the next half century. ... Read more

Product Description
The phrase global warming is a term that has been in common usage for some time and usually refers to recent warming of Earth s atmosphere, which also implies a manmade or human influence. Each chapter of this book deals with an aspect of it. Starting with A for Amazon, the book takes the reader an A-Z journey through global warming, with each chapter dealing with a specific point on the issue of climate change and global warming. Biofuels are looked at, Carbon Dioxide, Electric Vehicles through to Weather, Xtinction, You Can Help and finally Zero Hour.... The book is illustrated throughout to assist in the simplification of this complex subject matter. 10% of authors net sale proceeds will be divided between 4 global warming related organisations, to include The Alliance for Climate Protection, WWF, Global Cool, and Pure the Clean Planet Trust. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

A-Z of Global Warming-Kindle Edition
The A-Z of Global Warming book is now available on Kindle for E-Download. The book provides a complete guide on all matters relating to global warming from the Amazon, Biofuels, Carbon Dioxide to Electric Vehicles, Weather and extinction. Book is illustrated throughout and is supported with facts sourced from NASA, NOAA, WWF, Stern Review, IPCC, NSIDC, and other organisations. This book is for anyone wanting to get to the facts on this complex subject without the scientific jargon and laborious text that most books on this subject matter suffer with.

Climate Change Clarified
A great book, dealing with all apsects of global warming, set in unusual, but handy A-Z format. Covers all aspects of the topic, accompanied by nice illustrations and photo's. If you want to get straight to the heart of the subject, without too much heavy science, then this is the book for you... easy to read, concise, absorbing and well written...referenced throughout. A worthy addition to the global warming book shelf...

Global warming simplified...
A nicely written book, covering and simplifying all aspects of climate change and global warming. A refreshing, simplified and easy to read book on this subject. Lovely illustrations too.... highly reccommended.

Creative, Inspirational, Educational
Mr. Rosser's passionate and "ordinary person" approach to this subject is refreshing. He explains concepts of global warming in plain terms and the key points at the end of each chapter are very helpful.
Evidently, the author is also the artist. The drawings throughout the book are very appealing and nearly tell the story all on their own.

The book is just the right length and has nice feel to it. With so many books currently available on this subject, this one stands out as a favorite.

A-Z of Global Warming
This book provides the reader with a complete guide on all the issues related to Global Warming and Climate Change. It cuts straight to the science and is written in unique and unusual A-Z format in easy to understand laymans terms. The A-Z format seems to cover all possible aspects of global warming with the information taken from numerous scientific sources, including NASA, NOAA, The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, NSIDC, the IPCC, and the WWF, and other organisations. The book takes the reader on a journey from the relevance of The Amazon, Biofuels, Carbon Dioxide, Deforestation, Electric Vehicles and Transport through to the Weather, Xtinction (extinction) and what You can do to help...Almost all chapters are illustrated with the authors own handrawn annotated illustrations or with NASA and NOAA photo's and graphs. A must for anyone interested in getting to the bottom of this hot and complex topic! ... Read more

Product Description

“Comprehensive, readable, and replete with current, useful examples, this book provides a much-needed explanation of how to be a critical consumer of the scientific claims we encounter in our everyday lives.”

–April Cordero Maskiewicz, Department of Biology, Point Loma Nazarene University

“Seethaler’s book helps the reader look inside the workings of science and gain a deeper understanding of the pathway that is followed by a scientific finding–from its beginnings in a research lab to its appearance on the nightly news.”

–Jim Slotta, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

“How I wish science was taught this way! Seethaler builds skills for critical thinking and evaluation. The book is rich with examples that not only illustrate her points beautifully, they also make it very interesting and fun to read.”

–Julia R. Brown, Director, Targacept, Inc.

Don’t Get Hoodwinked! Make Sense of Health and Science News...and Make Smarter Decisions!

Every day, there’s a new scientific or health controversy. And every day, it seems as if there’s a new study that contradicts what you heard yesterday. What’s really going on? Who’s telling the truth? Who’s faking it? What do scientists actually know—and what don’t they know? This book will help you cut through the confusion and make sense of it all—even if you’ve never taken a science class! Leading science educator and journalist Dr. Sherry Seethaler reveals how science and health research really work...how to put scientific claims in context and understand the real tradeoffs involved...tell quality research from junk science...discover when someone’s deliberately trying to fool you...and find more information you can trust!  Nobody knows what new controversy will erupt tomorrow. But one thing’s for certain: With this book, you’ll know how to figure out the real deal—and make smarter decisions for yourself and your family!

Watch the news, and you’ll be overwhelmed by snippets of badly presented science: information that’s incomplete, confusing, contradictory, out-of-context, wrong, or flat-out dishonest. Defend yourself! Dr. Sherry Seethaler gives you a powerful arsenal of tools for making sense of science. You’ll learn how to think more sensibly about everything from mad cow disease to global warming–and how to make better science-related decisions in both your personal life and as a citizen.

You’ll begin by understanding how science really works and progresses, and why scientists sometimes disagree. Seethaler helps you assess the possible biases of those who make scientific claims in the media, and place scientific issues in appropriate context, so you can intelligently assess tradeoffs. You’ll learn how to determine whether a new study is really meaningful; uncover the difference between cause and coincidence; figure out which statistics mean something, and which don’t.

Seethaler reveals the tricks self-interested players use to mislead and confuse you, and points you to sources of information you can actually rely upon. Her many examples range from genetic engineering of crops to drug treatments for depression...but the techniques she teaches you will be invaluable in understanding any scientific controversy, in any area of science or health.

^   Potions, plots, and personalities: How science progresses, and why scientists sometimes disagree

^   Is it “cause” or merely coincidence? How to tell compelling evidence from a “good story”

^   There are always tradeoffs: How to put science and health claims in context, and understand their real implications

^   All the tricks experts use to fool you, exposed! How to recognize lies, “truthiness,” or pseudo-expertise

Customer Reviews (18)

Clear, helpful and useful
The others have done a good job of explaining this book. It is an antidote to my screaming at the TV or newspaper and saying "that's not clear, you idiot" I wanted to buy a bunch of copies and make each member of my family read it. Then I'd take it down to the grandkids school and volunteer to teach this stuff.
We NEED to think like this. We need to stop being so gullible to stakeholders. The election ads illustrate this easily.

Don't look now, your agenda's showing...
This is not new information, and contrary to what the author purports, many science teachers today can and do teach this stuff.It's also frequently taught in health classes and in some language arts classes.But seriously, how many people remember even a fraction of what they learned in middle school and high school?

Anyway, this book, though it does have good information regarding media manipulation, corporate number juggling, etc., is by no means unbiased.She may have tried to appear neutral, but in every example her choice of vocabulary to describe the actions and ideas of the various interested parties make it quite clear which side of the debates she falls on.

I would suggest using the tools in this book to evaluate the book itself as you read it - a mildly amusing activiy.I did want to finish it because of my background in science and education, but I was very disappointed in the bias.I had my hopes up, too.Oh well.

Elucidation
First and foremost: The author knows the correct use of "elucidate." How do I know this? She makes endless use of the word in this otherwise ho-hum book.

OK, so science wasn't your bag in high school, and that college you attended let you graduate without additional math, and perhaps only a poet's look at some form of science, and now you wonder what all the hubbub is about.

This book is written to be your salvation. That's what it says, right there in the first pages.

Yep, and pigs fly, not that it really mentions anything about flying pigs. I just used that to emphasize my lack of excitement about this book.

Perhaps it's because I've worked in an erstwhile science all these many years, but I found the book deadly dull. Enough so that it probably would work as an introduction to a research methods class of some sort, not that I'm likely to ever teach one of those again.

Looking for a read to see you through the next business trip? This is not it.

Good Basic Info
If you have a casual interest in science but would like to learn more about the process and how to evaluate research you hear in the news, this is a great guide.It's well written and action-oriented, being a quick read that doesn't feel padded.

I give it 4 stars instead of 5 only because more advanced readers may not learn anything new.They'll still enjoy the read and it will serve as a good refresher, though.

Good introduction to the world of science
The author begins by noting that (Page xvii): "My goal in writing this book is to help people make sense of the science-related issues that impact their daily lives." The following ten chapters try to show how science as an enterprise works, how disagreements develop, and how they are resolved. The book also addresses how to make sense of scientific disagreements. The conclusion notes 20 applications of what went before.

Among examples: Legitimate criticism can be distinguished from science bashing; Beware of the self-declared revolutionary who claims to be unappreciated by the scientific community; The meaning of statistics can be distorted by the data collection procedures.

The book provides grist for thinking about science in chapter 10, by providing case studies of claims, who is making the claim, clues as to whether the claim is scientifically based or not, caveats regarding the findings, and an evaluation of the piece of research mentioned. In short, the chapter provides test cases of the reader's ability to apply lessons to concrete examples of research.

At any rate, a useful volume that helps readers make sense of the enterprise of science and evaluate scientific debate. Well written. . . .
... Read more

Product Description
Reforestation and avoiding deforestation are methods of harnessing nature to tackle global warming - the greatest challenge facing humankind. In this book, Colin Hunt deals comprehensively with the present and future role of forests in climate change policy and practice.

The author provides signposts for the way ahead in climate change policy and offers practical examples of forestry's role in climate change mitigation in both developed and tropical developing countries. Chapters on measuring carbon in plantations, their biodiversity benefits and potential for biofuel production complement the analysis. He also discusses the potential for forestry in climate change policy in the United States and other countries where policies to limit greenhouse gas emissions have been foreshadowed. The author employs scientific and socio-economic analysis and lays bare the complexity of forestry markets. A review of the workings of carbon markets, based both on the Kyoto Protocol and voluntary participation, provides a foundation from which to explore forestry's role. Emphasis is placed on acknowledging how forests' idiosyncrasies affect the design of markets for sequestered carbon. The realization of forestry's potential in developed countries depends on the depth of cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, together with in-country rules on forestry. An increase in funding for carbon retention in tropical forests is an immediate imperative, but complexities dictate that the sources of finance will likely be dedicated funds rather than carbon markets.

This timely and comprehensive book will be of great value to any reader interested in climate change. Policy-makers within international agencies and governments, academics and students in the fields of geography, economics, science policy, forestry, development studies as well as carbon market participants and forest developers in the private sector will find it especially useful. ... Read more

Product Description
Our ecological dilemmas provoke powerful emotions and deeply contested views. How should we think about them? And how can we live together, or even talk together, when we cannot listen to people who think differently?

In a lively and at times very funny book, Roger S. Gottlieb (A Greener Faith, This Sacred Earth, A Spirituality of Resistance) explores these questions in a collection of distinct but related philosophical short stories. Fictional characters with personalities, individual histories, and strong opinions wrestle with the meaning of life, the value of nature, animal rights, the roles of science and religion in environmentalism, and political choices facing environmental activists--as well as their own anger, fear, despair, and close-mindedness. Encountering forcefully articulated positions and engaging characters, readers will be moved to reconsider their own beliefs--and to examine personal barriers to truly listening to those "on the other side." ... Read more

Product Description
The second edition of Dessler and Parson's acclaimed book provides an integrated treatment of the science, technology, economics, policy, and politics of climate change. Aimed at the educated non-specialist, and at courses in environmental policy or climate change, the book clearly lays out the scientific foundations of climate change, the issues in current policy debates, and the interactions between science and politics that make the climate change debate so contentious and confusing. This new edition is brought completely up to date to reflect the rapid movement of events related to climate change. In addition, all sections have been improved, in particular a more thorough primer on the basic science of climate change is included. The book also now integrates the discussion of contrarian claims with the discussion of current scientific knowledge; extends the discussion of cost and benefit estimates; and provides an improved glossary. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (9)

climate Con: How It Pays Off
What if CO2 emissions from 6,000 older inefficient PCs in Duluth could be reduced by half by replacing them with one big 5-acre computer in Des Moines run by just 88 people? Think of what we'd save in CO2 emissions!
We'll establish another UN bureaucracy with green jobbers to monitor this mitigation plan! And we'll finance it all - and a make a ton of money - with an annual fee per ton of CO2 emissions saved - paid by New Yorkers required by law to pony up - every year for the life of the computer in Des Moines, estimated at 20 years. We'll charge fees for any files printed in Des Moines and delivered to Duluth (but ignore the CO2 emissions generated in transit).
Along with the Teamsters, NGOs and bureaucrats, New Yorkers will be thrilled by this plan since these are green jobs and, after all, we're saving the planet!
And what could possibly be better than that?

[...]

Ludicrous right wing baloney.
Ludicrous right wing baloney. There have now been thousands of peer-reviewed professional papers published by seasoned relevant researchers demonstrating, not only historically out of bounds global climate CHANGE (not all of it will be warming), but statistically driven proof of human causality. How many peer reviewed studies have been published demonstrating a LACK of human causality? Anyone? Oh, that's right. It is zero, zip, nada. Right wingers lie about climate change but scientists go by the results, even if they contradict their possible pre-existing beliefs. I have seen quite a few professionals who have abandoned their prior skepticism about climate CHANGE (not all of it will be warming). Why is the British government leading the global effort to deal with the issue. Because they are scared spitless by the increasingly rapid loss of the Greenland icecap. NASA satellite measurements have recently shown that the loss rate has been twice that predicted only about 5 years ago. This leads to a great increase in 'bergs' being calved off of the edge of the icecap. These bergs float out into the northern Atlantic and slowly melt when they get in the warm current coming across from the Gulf. This influx of cold fresh water decreases the salinity of the so-called 'Atlantic conveyor' which carries heat from the warmer southern waters up to the area of the British Isles. The heat is released there, often in the form of warm precipitation, and the cooler resulting water sinks to the bottom due to its high salinity and flows back towards the south. Seabed deposits show that the Atlantic conveyor has totally stopped several times (at least) in the last 100,000 years. That is very much not a good thing. The loss of the added heat from the Atlantic conveyer basically makes the British Isles and much of western Europe almost uninhabitable and destroys any form of agriculture. Only the most incompetent leader would stand back and watch that sad fate developing without taking immediate strong action. I firmly believe that Tony Blair tried to maintain close ties with the current administration to get more influence over U.S. climate change policy. It remains to be seen whether that worked. And, yes, there have been numerous warming and cooling periods on Earth historically. Primarily driven by the increasing well understood Milankovitch cycles. The cycles run the earth's climate system with a little help (!) from the sun. The statistical variance in a cycle comes from other influences including human intervention.

Global Warming:Reality
Dessler and Parson have provided a welcome contribution on the subject of climate change. It is, of course, a nightmare for the climate change denial folks. Clearly written and making the critical distinction between science and political decision making, the authors lay out the case for a rapid response to a looming disaster. The book provides a counter balance for the nonsense being spewed forth by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Joanne Nova and Senator Orrin Hatch. It will not change the minds of politicians whose campaigns are funded by the energy industry, but it should sway the opinion of a literate public with its compelling arguments: 'We have met the enemy and he is us.'

excellent, brief introduction to the science and politics
In my effort to learn about climate change, I found it admittedly very difficult to read the lengthy IPCC reports (e.g. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis), so it's wonderful to have Dessler's and Parson's short, inexpensive book to give a guide to the findings of the IPCC, as well as to explain some of the politics in a calm, rational way. I think that any citizen genuinely interested in this topic should try to become familiar with the actual IPCC findings.

What is the IPCC ?What have they concluded ?How uncertain are the conclusions ?How have the policy makers reacted ?What are the scientific criticisms ?These issues are explained in this nice compact book.A very good aspect of this book is that it conforms to the standard practice of scientific argument: it shows data, describes theories (models), discusses how the theory fits data, explains the uncertainties, and (importantly) cites references.When looking into this subject, I suggest the reader beware of books or articles that are primarily "expert opinion" with no, or very little, reference to actual data.

The only reasons I didn't give 5 stars are: a) I would have liked it if the book could have covered the 2007 edition of IPCC report (maybe they will update it ?), and b) The book has a somewhat dry, academic style which probably will not make it very popular with a mass audience, hence limiting it's impact.At least it's short, though. Perhaps when they update it they can bring in a science writer to improve the style.

Eschew Obfuscation
I was disappointed in the writing.The book reads like a scientific treatise.The authors write, "This tangling of positive with normative claims, and of explicit arguments with unstated assumptions, obstructs reasoned deliberations on public policy."(p. 22.)OK.No doubt this is true.It borders on common sense and needs to be said.The problem is that, for the non-scientific person to whom this book is addressed, such language obstructs understanding.We don't talk that way.I gather that the authors are keen to be as objective and sound in their discussion as possible.Certainly this is commendable.Do they need to speak in these kinds of terms in order to be objective?Do they need to speak in such language in order to convey these basic concepts?Not to the degree they have done so.I give the book only four stars because I was anxious to learn more about this topic, and I was annoyed when an "accessible primer" is made unnecessarily difficult.I'm not planning in taking a degree in the subject. ... Read more

Product Description
We can do better than just slow down global warming. We can fix it. This book shows how.Increasing the organic matter in the world's soils is the only practical and cost-effective way to stop the worldwide catastrophe of global warming. By switching to sustainable energy sources that don't add carbon to the atmosphere, we can keep global warming stopped. Yet these proven solutions are poorly understood, scattered among specialties, and surrounded by confusion and conflict. Priority One shows how to combine these proven solutions so we can stabilize the world's climate, bolster lagging economies, and enhance human health. But we need to act now, before this one-time opportunity is gone. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Interesting ideas, some inaccuracies
The idea of sequestering carbon in organic soils is interesting, particularly the idea of no-till farming which requires much less energy and chemicals than "modern" farming methods.Understanding carbon cycles in agriculture and forestry is currently a subject of intense study.The sheer quantity of land involved makes this an important component of any plan to reduce carbon emissions.The book is worth reading for the author's willingness to consider unorthodox ideas and methods.I doubt his assumptions regarding the ease of disposal of nuclear waste, in light of the mess we are now trying to clean up next to the Columbia River in Washington State.This, and other leaps of logic, seemed to conflict with reason.Glean the unique ideas, but you are better off reading scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals for accurate information.

The only complete book on the problem
An intrepid, thorough exploration of the issue of global warming, focused on proven solutions. Al Gore and others have done great work in bringing the problem to the awareness of many, but if our only antidote is restricting emissions, we have no way of reducing excess atmospheric carbon, no way of solving the problem. The message becomes, "let's wreck the planet more slowly."

If that message seems lacking or indifferent to you, then you owe it to yourself and your descendants to read this book.

The soil contains twice the carbon that the atmosphere does, in organic matter. Generations of moldboard plowing, nitrogen fertilizer, and other agrochemicals have put this carbon into the atmosphere to a far greater extent than most realize. There are huge potentials, based on solidly proven and economically sound techniques, for reversing this flow, for removing the excess carbon from the atmosphere and stabilizing it in soil organic matter. Perennial grasses are key, and yield tremendous auxiliary benefits. The 8 percent or so of the earth's surface that is agricultural and pastureland soils, over which we have great influence through food and farm decisions and policies, could remove the excess atmospheric carbon fairly quickly.

Many have recognized the potential of increasing soil carbon to mitigate or stop global warming. But it has been a difficult concept for an urbanized population to comprehend. It is far easier to focus on emissions from smokestacks and exhaust pipes. Allan Yeomans has been in agriculture most of his life, and he does an excellent and thorough job of explaining soil carbon and other relevant topics to nonexperts.

Yeomans points to biofuels and nuclear energy as the solution to continued high energy needs. Again, these are not speculative potentials, but solidly proven. His comparison of the risks of nuclear to those of coal and oil are fascinating and revealing.

This book contains provocative, inconvenient truths. It is NOT conventional thinking. The climate change discussion will never be the same.

Viable Solutions Instead of Platitudes--In Public Service

This 492 page book is the work of a a seriious pioneer in Australia who decided that the public could use a serious book with serious solutions, instead of the range of platitudes, fear-mongering, or outright misrepresentation (energy companies like Exxon lying about the facts).

It is an over-size bookthat ships from the USA and reached me in a few days instead of the 4-6 weeks that Amazon shows.It is very well laid out, two-column, 12 chapters, listing 50 specific local, national, and global strategies that can be implemented today.I regard this book as the graduate school equivalent of "50 Simple Things You Can Do to Save the Earth."

What I find especially powerful about this book is that it focuses less on the industrial undermining of the atmosphere, and more on agriculture, which suffers from a range of problems including top soil rather than deep root farming, very unwise use of toxic chemcials that pollute aquifers (while failing to separate animal feces from water feeding into spinach fields, as the US found to its horror recently).

The author also does a superb job of pointing out that global warming is an ENERGY problem as much as it is an emissions problem.It is down-right nuts for the US to contront Iran over the need for nuclear energy while pretending that the US is not the primary proliferator of both nuclear technologies and the weapons of death.Safe nuclear energy as well as many forms of renewalbe solar and wind energy, and portable energy such as hydrogen from water using a renewable energy to make it effective, are all with us now.

Bottom line: this book should be in every educational program that seeks to understand solutions, and this book should be required reading for everyone that respects "Inconvenient Truth."This book is the book you read after you agree with Al Gore, and recognize that he is summarizing, very eloquently, the problem, without actually providing any solutions.

Winston Churchill, God-Father of the English-speaking peoples, is smiling down at Allan Yeomans, the author and self-financed publisher of this volume--he's fighting the real war for our future, rather than the false war against terrorism.

A book like this would normally sell for US$75 or so, but the author, as a public service, ordered it to be priced close to cost plus Amazon commision plus shipping from Australia, and only recently found a US distributor so the book could be listed in the world's single greatest library catalog, Amazon.com. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (5)

The BEST children's book on this subject
Winston of Churchill is a beautifully written, beautifully illustrated book.And aside from other children's books on similar subject matter, this is the ONLY one with a combination of an important message, a real plot with dramatic structure, and a sense of humor.The children's classic about saving the environment is The Lorax.But unlike The Lorax, this book offers a more laughs and a greater sense of hope.My children kept asking to have it read over and over again, and they have now memorized it.I hope you and your children get to know it, too!

Incredible!
What a timely and relevant book for children's understanding about Global Warming.It has become the "go to" book for the issues that concern our environment and the impact we have on our world.

Well written book!
This book is about a serious subject, but is written in a very child appropriate fashion.It's a great read-aloud for rich discussion about how each of us can make a difference.A nice blend of facts and fiction.Cute illustrations!

Thoughtful and motivational picturebook.
Winston of Churchill: One Bear's Battle Against Global Warming is a charming children's picutrebook that addresses a serious modern social issue. Winston the polar bear of Churchill, Canada has observed that the earth is getting warmer due to human-generated pollution, and wants to mobilize his fellow bears to do something about it. "Burning gasoline in cars makes carbon dioxide. Methane gas comes from rotting garbage in landfills. Digging for oil an natural gas and mining coal lets out a gas called nitrous oxide. Too much of these gases is no good. But green plants turn carbon dioxide into oxygen, which is very good. People need to burn less gas, make less garbage, and plant more trees." However, Winston's wife notices that Winston himself contributes to global warming - by smoking a big, burning, smelly cigar! "'How can you convince people to stop doing what they're doing unless you can show that every little bit helps?' His wife glared at him. 'No cigar or I'm not going.'" Winston learns that the most persuasive way to advocate change is to change himself, and gives up his cigar to help convince humans to improve their world, in this thoughtful and motivational picturebook.

A perfect children's picture book
This beautifully illustrated children's book coveys a serious message with great good humor and a sense of fun. Its hard not to fall in love with the stogie-smoking Winston as he rallies his polar bear troops to fight global warming. And to sympathize with Mrs. Winston as she wages her own war against cigar smoking. Preschool and early school age children will learn not only about the major environmental threat of our times, but will be introduced to a famous historical figure who, like his namesake Winston of Churchill, rallied his fellow citizens to fight an impending disaster. No young child in your life would be disappointed to receive this lovely book as a gift. ... Read more

Product Description
This title features graphic expeditions. Explore history without the confine of time or distance. Dr. Isabel Solo is an archaeologist and world explorer with the skills to go wherever and whenever she needs to research history, solve a mystery or rescue colleagues in trouble. Readers join Izzy on her journeys and gain knowledge about historical places, eras and cultures on the way. ... Read more

Product Description
Includes essays by Nobel Laureate Dr. Norman E. Borlaug and other noted scientists and scholars
The modern environmental movement began with the publication of three seminal works, Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, Paul Ehrlich's The Population Bomb, and the Club of Rome's The Limits to Growth. These books' dismal visions of a poisoned, over-populated, resource-depleted world spiraling down toward environmental collapse are today's conventional wisdom. And every year we hear about new "conclusive" reports from special interest groups claiming that our atmosphere's temperatures are soaring, our air and water are more polluted, our cities are more crowded, and our global food supply is more precarious than ever before. However, according to a number of leading scientists from around the world, members of the environmental movement are guilty of twisting—sometimes manufacturing—the facts in an effort to frighten people into joining their cause.
In this eye-opening book, some of the most respected researchers in the country explode the myths behind much of the doom and gloom of today's environmental movement. You will discover how the hysteria about global warming, overpopulation, mass extinctions, imminent famines, biotechnology, energy shortages, and more are grounded not in reason but in false science and a fear of progress. When placed beside the overwhelming facts, some of the most pervasive eco-myths crumble, including:
Myth:
Antarctica is melting due to global warming—threatening to raise ocean levels
Fact:
Antarctica has been cooling—and its glaciers thickening—for the past 30 years
Myth:
The global population is growing faster than our ability to produce food
Fact:
Global fertility rates are falling dramatically, and with advanced technology, farmers are producing more food using fewer resources than ever before
Myth:
Solar- and wind-powered generators are a renewable, efficient, and less intrusive alternative to gas-, oil-, and coal-burning generators
Fact:
Global fossil fuel supplies are in no near-term danger of being depleted, and a single 555-megawatt natural gas power plant produces more electricity than 13,000 windmills
Myth:
Modern pesticides and fertilizers are increasing the rates of cancer in humans
Fact:
No study has ever shown that anyone has developed cancer from the legal application of pesticides, and environmental pollution accounts for at most 2 percent of all cancer cases versus 30 percent caused by tobacco use
And many more
Ultimately, this book shows that uniting much of the environmental movement is an agenda that is not so much anti-pollution as it is anti-human. Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths lays out the true state of the planet, which, as you'll discover, is more healthy, vibrant, and clean than ideologically motivated environmentalists want you to believe. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (47)

A good choice to learn
I read this good book, here in Brazil. I'm an agronomist and I like to read books.
In more than 350 pages, this book has many excellent parts. I'll give you ten examples of these excellent parts:
1-On Page 24:"The five most significant droughts in the past 2,000 years all occurred prior to 1600."
2-On page 42:"One of the last major land frontiers are the vast acid-soils areas found in the Brazilian cerrado and llanos of Colombia and Venezuela, central and southern Africa, and Indonesia."
3-Page 51:"Despite the formidable opposition by many ideological environmentalists to transgenic crops, commercial adoption by farmers of the new varieties has been one of the most rapid cases of technology diffusion in the history of agriculture. Between 1996 and 2001, the are planted commercially to transgenic crops has increased 30-fold(Table 2.9)."
4-Page 78:"The vision of the link between rapid opulation growth and political destablization, however, is sometimes undercut by the very evidence to support it. Take Gore's aforementioned attribution of the carnage in the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s to rapid population growth. The problem with the argument is that the former Yugoslavia was characterized by especially rapid rates of population growth nor by particularly high levels of fertility."
5-Page 115:"Economic development and free markets are the keys to increasing energy efficiency. In 1986, a few years before the collapse of the Berlin Wall, the United States and the other developed countries used less than half the amount of energy per dollar of GDP that the socialist economies used. Communist North Korea uses roughly three times as much energy to produce a dollar of output as South Korea does."
6-Page 133:"It is not the natural resources, but good ideas that developing countries lack."
7-Page 206:"What is too often overlooked by antibiotech activists, however, is the fact that bioengeneered crop varieties have substancial positive impacts on the environment."
8-Page 223:"Thus on a global scale, renewable water supplies exceed demand by a factor of about 12.Not purifying water can be disastrous. In 1991, failure to chlorinate drinking water supplies in Peru contributed to a massive outbreak of cholera that infected more than 300,000, killing several thousand. "
9-Page 288:"As two malaria researchers observe,:"DDT has saved countless millions of lifes, while Greenpeace struggles to find some evidence that it harms mankind."
10-Page 336:"Agricultural production has consistently outpaced population growth over the past 30 years."
Even with so many excellent parts, I can't give five stars for this book, because of some minor mistakes:
1-Page 44 has a mistake about Brazilian company Embrapa.
2-Page 137 has a mistake about Bengal famine.Maoist and Chinese famine between 1958 and 1964 was the biggest in world's history.
3-Pages 245 and 262 have a mistake about hydrogen.
4-Page 336 has a mistake about crops in the former USSR. The author takes as trues the ghost-crops in the former USSR.
These mistakes are combined less than one page, in a book with more than 350. This book is a good choice to learn about ecology, global warming, malthusian believes,etc. Please, I'm an agronomist, but this book is for anyone, including yourself.

Old and dated,isn't consistant with author's own currents beliefs
Facts and science on this topic are moving and advancing so fast Please don't read old books to learn about Global warming!!!
Words from the same author 3 years later in 2005. Quote:["People who have doubted predictions of catastrophic global warming (and that includes me) have long cited the satellite data series derived by climatologists John Christy and Roy Spencer at the University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH). That data set showed a positive trend of 0.088 degrees centigrade per decade until recently. On a straight line extrapolation that trend implied warming of less than 1.0 degree centigrade by 2100."]

An anthology worth picking up
The good part about anthologies is that they tend to cover more ground than an author normally would on his/her own.Such serves the reader well."Global Warming and Other Eco-myths" does cover much ground in the realm of "fierce ecological advocacy," handling topics on population, natural resources, water, industrial products, and of course, global warming.There are three chapters on general policy-philosophy which go along with topic-specific chapters.

The themes which run through all parts of the book may roughly be summarized as:1.Strident environmentalism needs to be braked with logical thinking and a truthful look at actual data;2.Too many "hot" environmental topics of the past have been misunderstood at best, intentionally misleading at worst;3.Human beings are not Earth's pests; and 4. Human brains are the most powerful force for solving these largely technological problems discussed in the book.No reader will agree with everything in this work.In fact Ron Bailey, the editor, has since this book's publication changed much of his mind on the global warming part![http://www.reason.com/news/show/126851.html]

For sure it is worth your picking up this book.This reviewer purchased a copy for reference.Who know?In a decade and one-half, let's see how much of this pans out -- results are always the best judge!

Global Warming for the uneducated
I think books like this are dangerous and to those who insist we ignore global warming problems I just want to ask you to answer this one question: What if we continue to ignore this crisis and you are wrong. What then ???? If we do indeed choose to continue to ignore these issues and you happen to be wrong then it will be too late to do anything about them. As a result we all need to do our part and play the safe side which is to assume there is a big global warming problem and do what we can to protect the environment at any cost as we only have one environment people and noone should have the power to dictate that we ignore this crisis.

October 23, 2007 in San Diego
As I write this review, I'm watching TV coverage of a fire -- 13 fires actually -- that has destroyed already more than 1000 homes in Southern California, killed at least two and severely burned dozens more, and destroyed well over 100,000 acres of landscape. The fire has been fueled and spread by Santa Ana winds of up to 100 miles per hour. The whole event is precisely what the environmentalists and climatologists, demonized by this fraudulent book, would predict and have predicted.
Wake up, ideologues! Don't burn your copies of Ayn Rand and Ann Coulter; that would merely add to the carbon load, which by the way has just been measured by Australian climatologists as HIGHER than expected right now, at the same time that the ability of the ocean to dissolve and keep CO2 in solution is testing LOWER than expected. There is no eco-myth. There is only self-serving petro-fraud and libertarian tomfoolery. At this point, denying the probable consequences of rapid anthropogenic climate change is an act of social irresponsibility verging on a crime against humanity, especially the humanity fo our children.
There is little in this book that hasn't been covered in similar manifestos of denial, such as the PIGuide to Global Warming. Don't be deceived; this is a political tract, not a book of balanced science. However, if you want to approach the problem reasonably, you might take a look at "Kicking the Carbon Habit" by William Sweet, or "Global Warming: a Very Short Introduction" by Mark Maslin. ... Read more