6 of 46 people found the following review helpful
Six Degrees--Mark Lynas,
This review is from: Six Degrees: Our Future On A Hotter Planet (Paperback)
As a confirmed anti climate change,man made global warming skeptic I found this book unreadable, and more like a science fiction novel, I read about a quarter and had to put it down, very doubtful if I shall return to it. Really suprised that it received ''Winner--Prizes for Science Books 08'' from the Royal Institution. A scaremongering book of the first order.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 12 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 25 May 2010 15:24:40 BDT
So it's a toss-up between the Royal Institution on the one hand, and eltorro of Wales on the other...boy, that's a tough one.
Posted on 23 Mar 2013 13:22:42 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 26 Jun 2014 15:26:10 BDT]
In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2013 14:55:11 GMT
You can not read a book from Amazon without first buying it.
In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2013 15:12:22 GMT
I read many papers, books and articles on the subject of the environment and Climate change, most by accredited scientists in that field, I look at it from an historical and futuristic point of view, and the evidence I find does not convince me. As you will know there has been a retreat by many bodies pushing this theory. It certainly made a lot of money for Mr. Gore and others on the bandwagon, and ultimately coming from you pocket.
In reply to an earlier post on 25 Mar 2013 12:19:46 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 26 Jun 2014 14:58:01 BDT]
In reply to an earlier post on 25 Jun 2014 11:51:29 BDT
james conibear says:
97% expert consensus on human-caused global warming. This is the most vital issue to mankind. I truly hope that the 3% are correct, but I'd rather err on the side of caution and go with the findings of the other 97%. I suggest you finish the book and then think about the consequences of denying man made climate change and global warming.
In reply to an earlier post on 25 Jun 2014 13:46:05 BDT
Don't know where you get your 97% from- it certainly is not % of scientists.Go back in history thousands of years up to the present, the world has seen several peaks and troughs in temperatures and climates, none of which could possibly attributed to man, before man was present on earth and lit the first fire! I have read many books on the subject written by scientists and climatologists, notable in their professions, the book in question I found to be alarmist and exploitative of the subject as far as I read, I have no intention of delving into it further. The question to be asked is 'where is the evidence?' The progression of the man made'' global warming' believers dropping that title in favour of 'climate change' somewhat gives the game away, no one can deny climate change it has been present forever!
In reply to an earlier post on 25 Jun 2014 22:19:15 BDT
Excessive alarmism is clearly counter-productive in the current debate - but so is excessive complacency. When the history of this sorry period comes to be written in 100 years' time, it may very well be called Heads in the Sand. As for evidence, don't you think that there may, just may, be a link between the continuing rise in CO2 emissions and the accelerating melting of the polar ice caps? The 97% that you're so snooty about certainly think so.
In reply to an earlier post on 26 Jun 2014 14:56:25 BDT
Last edited by the author on 27 Jun 2014 15:30:46 BDT
Bookworm Pete says:
There can be no doubt that the climate on Earth does fluctuate naturally and there is lots of evidence to support this much of which has come from climate scientists. From what I've read on the subject the question being asked has always been whether we humans have directly altered the natural cycle. The consensus seems to be that we have.
The other issue is with the predictions that are reported for what the next 20, 50 or 100 years have in store for us. Predictions are always going to be viewed with an inherent suspicion because they are essentially a guess.
Personally I can't see how we haven't altered the natural cycle of the planet. Given the amount of toxic chemicals we pump out and the way we cut down everything to make way for our metal and concrete cities. I do hope we can get over the ridiculous bickering and come up with useful solutions to the world's problems.
In reply to an earlier post on 27 Jun 2014 11:11:00 BDT
I am the one of the least snooty people around, but having asked the question where do you get this figure of 97% from? Of the populace at large, of scientists, of lay people? I can't find this figure in any serious discusion on this subject. As to your first post the Royal I nstitution has erred on the wrong side in other matters