I am not as convinced as these authors would like me to be, after reading their book, that global warming is caused by humans. Their basic stance is 'We are scientists, believe in us' - but its not enough.
For example, they claim significantly temperature rise in recent decades. But of four graphs presented on pages 10 - 11, only one of them shows any such rise. The others do not. One graph even stops in the 1950's without explanation (Which one? Why?).
They claim that aerosols, whose character differs from north to south, explain the 1940 - 1960 cooling. Evidence is not apparent in the graphs on p33 - 34. I can't see much difference between north and south. Can you?
They claim that both natural and human influences are required to model warming. But look at the contrary evidence in the `Asia' graph on page 35.
I would prefer to see actual data on graphs (not lines smoothed out by scientists). And I expect graphs to be consistent with text. When they are not, I expect an honest explanation from the authors.
Then they have the audacity to suggest on page 37 that skeptics are `fools' - apparently unaware that their own message is improperly presented. Integrity in presenting evidence is important. I hope they can put this right in a future edition.
And if graphs are used why not use them throughout? - this book lacks a graph going back to the ice ages. That would have been very helpful to see. And don't think we're too foolish to understand it.