|  |  | | Customer Reviews: | | | Average Customer Review: Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Facts, Not Fiction about "Climate Change". Nov 19, 2009 Why can ex-Vice President Gore get his movie and books into establishments of education when they contain no facts?
This is an easy to read (at times humorous) book that is written by a real Climatologist who coincidentally worked at NASA with Dr. James Hansen who is not a Climatologist.
If you're interested in facts, not something to make a sci-fi movie from, you should pick this book up.
Especially, parents and anyone in education who are concerned about the future of the children in their charge so they can be prepared to give real answers to the question of whether or not we should be alarmed by the current uproar over the need to regulate and tax CO2.
With so many in Academics blindly following the lead of a what I call "Climate Whores" such as Al Gore and many who will benefit from Cap and Trade legislation you need to be informed aon real facts about weather and how the climate works.
disappointing review Oct 23, 2009 This book rightly raises the issue of how biased and maybe unfounded is the publicity supporting global warming- however the author gives no evidence of where the supporting science contradicts the notion of global warming. The book is mainly aimed at discrediting the motives of global warming (GW) supporters- and he may be right or wrong; some evidence showing where the science contradicts global warming would have been more convincing- but no evidence is presented- for or against GW. So after reading the book I am no further towards any decision. Better to read Climate Extremes- discusses quite a lot of evidence.
1 of 3 found the following review helpful:
This is a bunch of nonsense Oct 20, 2009 I worked as a "NASA climatologist" too, and can tell you that the IPCC is a very conservative commission. Every word in the executive summary must be agreed to by representatives of every participating country -- including countries full of climate skeptics. If it gets through there, there IS a political consensus, based on scientific consensus that has been built over the years through debate in the scientific journals. The evidence of warming are mounting -- melting in the Arctic and Greenland, spring coming earlier in many places, permafrost melting in Alaska and Siberia, etc. Even if humans only cause a small part of the warming, doesn't it make sense to do what we can to reduce it? This is the only part of warming that we can control. Check the video [...] for a good (and humorous) analysis of why action on climate change is at least a good idea.
1 of 1 found the following review helpful:
CLIMATE CONFUSION Aug 28, 2009 I'm very happy with the book, it's very clear, because in this issue (climate&weather) we can say that "we are beginning to know" and we have to learn very much. Mr. Spencer is very brave in these times (politically correct times) Congratulations to the author from Spain.
1 of 2 found the following review helpful:
Great Content, Execution Could Have Been Better Jun 07, 2009 I gave Climate Confusion (CC) 4 stars. I would have given it 5 stars based upon its content and ideas, but I thought the execution of this book left a little to be desired.
I'll deal with CC's literary value first. Now, it certainly was an easy read and the chapter organization was by-and-large well thought out. I'm not a fast reader and finished the 191-page book in about one week. Spencer has a very conversational style - you almost feel like you are in his classroom and he is a pretty cool teacher. But at times that style gets him in trouble, because he gets a little too familiar, violating that boundary that exists between writer and audience (I think he even addressed a question at one point to "you"). Spencer gets a little "preachy" at times, and I felt I was being scolded instead of being educated. On the plus side, he uses a lot of humor and that worked pretty well for me.
Again, I want to emphasize I enjoyed the reading experience, but these were some of the things that irritated me. Like a good teacher, he repeated his main points in each chapter, which was OK (my poor memory can use all the reinforcement it can get), but then he concluded with a Summary (Chapter 10), repeating every major point that he had previously made, instead of a Conclusion. I thought that was too much repetition and frankly, kind of a weird way to structure the book. Aside from that though, the progression of topics through each of the 10 chapters was very logical and well thought out.
In terms of the content and argument, this was a great book, exposing the Global Warming "con" for what it is. I won't repeat his argument here, you can buy the book and read it for yourself (or borrow it and read that Summary I was just complaining about).
Note: I am not currently a scientist, but as an undergrad and graduate student I was heavily involved in environmental research. For 5 years, I studied meteorology, climatology, and air pollution. I participated in 2 different federally-funded research projects dealing with the effects of weather on particulate air pollution. I co-authored 2 papers published in peer-reviewed journals. I know something about this subject from the inside. I am highly skeptical of the science behind global warming (and, I might add, the scientific basis for our attempts to reduce ozone pollution). In both case, science has been badly compromised by politics.
|
|  |
|