7 of 7 people found the following review helpful
on 2 March 2011
You have to wonder why we are in such a mess in relation to understanding climate change. The scientific community at large are doing themselves more damage to their credibilty over climate change than anything else.
This book starts by telling us how many scientists have lost their jobs by daring to question any of the politicians who claim that the science of global warming theory is settled. It is anything but settled.
This book goes through the many aspects of Global warming and many of the predictions and statements that are made. It looks at the facts and where they do not stack up with the statements it tells you what the differences are.
The book , for all that its content is scientific , is very readable. It is clear and well researched.
Buy it, read it, enjoy it.
And you too will understand
-the ebb and flow of the arctic ice
-how the data on warming has been massaged to fit with the theories and computer models
-how natural phenomena like elNino have a major impact on climate and have done so for thousands of years
- how the predictions are all the product of computer simulations - like a weather forcast for the next 500 years, ( we cannot forecast 3 days ahead let alone 500 years)
- and how little sea level rise and how little temperature change is actually predicted.
58 of 62 people found the following review helpful
on 25 March 2009
This is basically a major rewrite of Michaels' 2004 "Meltdown" book. Like Meltdown, it is very good. The authors accept that CO2 emissions are responsible for some global warming but they counsel against the alarmism that we see everywhere. They go to the science, and they make their case very well. Are there more hurricanes than there used to be? What might sea level rises be by 2100? What is the 'hockey stick' debate about? Are the poles melting and by how much? These questions and many more are examined with clarity and wit.
Michaels is an excellent writer and one always feels him to have a real command of his subject. He is a climatologist with years of employment at the university of Virginia under his belt.
He is unpopular with the mainstream scientific 'consensus' who regard him as too much of a sceptic - questions are asked as to his funding and his motivation, and sure some of his funding looks to be dubious and the Cato Institute is a right wing libertarian outfit. But this does not intrude into the text, except in a few areas where the authors offer potential solutions to some of the problems they perceive within the current scientific research environment.
This is an excellent and very accessible read, and I recommend it to mainstream and sceptic alike, and for all who like to do a bit of thinking 'outside the box'.