|
| The Deniers: The World Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud**And those who are too to do so | 
 enlarge | Author: Lawrence Solomon
Publisher: Richard Vigilante Books
Category: Book
List Price: $27.95
Buy New: $17.49
You Save: $10.46 (37%)
New (23) Used (6) from $16.49
Avg. Customer Rating:  49 reviews
Sales Rank: 5529
Media: Hardcover
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 240
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 9 x 6.2 x 1
ISBN: 0980076315
Dewey Decimal Number: 363.73874
EAN: 9780980076318
ASIN: 0980076315
Publication Date: April 1, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Condition: SHIPS from 5 locations based on your Zip Code and availability! (PA TN IN OR SC) *-* Gift Quality *-* Orders Processed Immediately! - We get your book to you Very Quickly! -L2353.22322
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 44 more reviews...
 An excellent portrait of many world-class scientists skeptical of current global-warming alarmism and their reasons for doubt. March 10, 2008
182 out of 198 found this review helpful
To read what is published by most of the popular media, which have jumped on the Global Warming bandwagon almost en masse, one would likely conclude that the matter is settled -- indeed, that is presently the chief claim intended to squelch all argument on the matter. Hardly a day goes by that one interested in the question doesn't hear claims that practically all scientists agree that Global Warming is upon us and that mankind's technological overreach, especially in adding CO2 to the atmosphere, is the primary cause. (And we are seldom reminded of the fact that climate change, often of far greater magnitudes than anything human beings have seen, has been taking place throughout not only all of human history but virtually all of Earth history -- which goes back not mere millions but billions of years before the first humans trod the Earth.)
Lawrence Solomon of Canada's National Post newspaper ably puts the present-day picture into perspective; he focuses on several dozen top-tier scientists in relevant fields from around the world and very readably describes their reasons for doubt on these matters, and never forgets to summarize the scientific facts behind them. While I myself don't yet have a copy of the book, I've essentially read all of it online during the course of last year on the National Post website, in which a new article appeared every week or two. Though Solomon at first set out to write only a few articles on a handful of these "deniers," the more he looked the more world-class research scientists he discovered among their ranks, and somewhat to his own surprise found these were hardly a fringe element but on the contrary at or near the pinnacles of their professions worldwide -- notwithstanding being virtually ignored by much of the media and, importantly, by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). But let Solomon speak on this in his own words:
"More than six months ago, I began writing this series, The Deniers. When I began, I accepted the prevailing view that scientists overwhelmingly believe that climate change threatens the planet. I doubted only claims that the dissenters were either kooks on the margins of science or sell-outs in the pockets of the oil companies.
"My series set out to profile the dissenters -- those who deny that the science is settled on climate change -- and to have their views heard. To demonstrate that dissent is credible, I chose high-ranking scientists at the world's premier scientific establishments. I considered stopping after writing six profiles, thinking I had made my point, but continued the series due to feedback from readers. I next planned to stop writing after 10 profiles, then 12, but the feedback increased. Now, after profiling more than 20 deniers [38 at last count], I do not know when I will stop -- the list of distinguished scientists who question the IPCC grows daily, as does the number of emails I receive, many from scientists who express gratitude for my series.
"Somewhere along the way, I stopped believing that a scientific consensus exists on climate change. Certainly there is no consensus at the very top echelons of scientists -- the ranks from which I have been drawing my subjects -- and certainly there is no consensus among astrophysicists and other solar scientists, several of whom I have profiled. If anything, the majority view among these subsets of the scientific community may run in the opposite direction." ...
"Most of the deniers I have written about have suffered for their scientific findings -- some have been forced from their positions, others lost funding grants or been publicly criticized. In writing about these ... , I have inadvertently added to their anguish. None among [them] welcome the term "denier" -- a hateful word that I used ironically, but perhaps illadvisedly. ... The word "denier," of course, is employed to tar scientists who dissent from IPCC convention. In other disciplines, dissent is part of what's called 'the scientific method' and lauded."
In summary, one has to read Solomon's profiles one by one to fully appreciate his fact-based approach, each succinctly and very readably expressed. After finishing the chapters -- which can easily be read either serially or separately in one's own chosen sequence depending on particular preferences or interest -- one will be left wondering how much of the media hype one hears is believable and how much may be gauze either inadvertently or deliberately pulled over one's eyes. At the very least it should stimulate the reader to think about these matters to which many may not have given much attention beyond a bland acceptance of the usual commentary one hears in so much of the media.
Winning the Debate April 7, 2008
80 out of 94 found this review helpful
Richard Vigilante has launched an eponymous publishing company--Richard Vigilante Books--that takes advantage of all the new Amazonian efficiencies to produce great books in days rather than years.
His first book, replete with statistics and material as recent as February 2008, ends the global warming debate before Al Gore can even start his new $300M climate change panic campaign.
Entitled The Deniers and already a #3 Amazon best seller in Canada and leaping listwise in the US, it tells the story of "The World Renowned scientists who stood up against global warming hysteria, political persecution, and fraud"
Gore recently declared, as I recall his words, that scientists opposing his theory are the kind of people who party together with the flat earth society, with holocaust deniers, and with cultists who claim that the Apollo moon landing was concocted on a back lot in Burbank.
But it turns out that these denier folk comprise most of the world's leading climate scientists, physicists, and statisticians, including hundreds of participants in the IPCC reports that Gore cites as an impregnable consensus. Among the scores of deniers interviewed and analyzed in the book are Freeman Dyson, the world's most eminent living physicist, Hendrik Tennekes, director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute who asserts that the global warmers cannot tell the difference between "clouds and clocks," David Bromwich, president of the International Commission on Polar Meteorology who can find no global warming signal "from the mainland of Antarctica right now," and Reid Bryson, "father of scientific climatology," the world's most cited climatologist and a sainted environmentalist, who responds to a question about Gore's movie: "Don't make me throw up."
Covering the range of global warming claims, from the famed "hockey stick graph" to a predicted rise of mosquito borne diseases, the book is fascinating and even profound on the flaws of computer modelling, the irrelevance of consensus to science, the crippling effects of excessive specialization, and the mounting evidence of a coming cooling trend.
Its author is Canadian environmentalist Lawrence Solomon, who ends with a cogent explanation of how carbon taxes and offsets devastate the environment.
George Gilder
Review of Deniers April 6, 2008
70 out of 78 found this review helpful
The author, Lawrence Solomon, comes from an "environmentalist" background having worked as an activist against nuclear power expansion and world rain forest protection, and as a journalist or the National Post of Toronto. This book stems from a series of newspaper articles on individual scientists that disagreed in some way with the "conventional wisdom" or "political correctness" of Global Warming, specifically, man's role in Global Warming. It is evident at the conclusion of the book that Mr. Solomon has considerable respect for the 30+ scientists which he has interviewed for the book. There is little question that in Mr. Solomon's words the question of man's role in Global Warming is not settled science.
This is really a remarkable book. The reader is able to take advantage of an author that has been able to converse with a cross section of some of the most outstanding scientists, an author who is obviously devoted to environmental ethics, and an author that can write with the clarity of a experienced journalist. Reading this book is a real education. The scientific questions broached touch on multiple topics in science, ranging from glaciers to malaria, from Antarctic to hurricanes, from low clouds to the Sun and the way the Sun and the planetary system impacts cosmic radiation, from geologic history to the way science is done, and finally to a plethora of scientific approaches to understanding the physics, chemistry, geochemical distribution and history of carbon dioxide in the earth, oceans, atmosphere.
What is important here? Public policy will be formulated on the results of science. One of Solomon's major concerns is that poor public policy stemming from poor science or misinterpreted science will have a negative impact on the world's poor. In addition to the science itself Mr. Solomon is very concerned with the way the results of science are received and acted upon in our political world.
Mr. Solomon treats each scientist with respect, giving each a mini resume. His order of treatment makes pedagogic sense and thematic sense. A real challenge of the book is to cover the scope of the science in a responsible and understandable way. In my opinion he does that admirably and concisely way.
He begins with a discussion of the word, Deniers, explaining its derogatory usage. meaning and emphasizes that most of these scientists do not consider themselves deniers. My sense is that both Solomon and the scientists discussed would have preferred the word Skeptics to Deniers. The word Deniers does set up the context of the book into the tension and edginess, that present circumstances deserve. The first scientist depicted is Edward Wegman, who along with a group of select scientists was asked by Congress to critique the famous hockey stick graph. Selected important graphs and data displays are used in the text with comparisons and unusually complete captions. Each chapter contains references and highlights available articles and their web locations or urls.
After you finish this book you will have a better understanding of how the temperature of the earth is measured and how the temperature history of the earth is approximated. An understanding of the cycle, sources and sinks of carbon dioxide is crucial and selected scientists that have give their life work to study of carbon dioxide in ice, in the ocean, in the earth, in the atmosphere, and in the earths history are reviewed. Does carbon dioxide drive temperature or does temperature drive carbon dioxide? This is the all important question to answer, and must be answered before we attempt to use policy to "correct" global warming. Is the earth really warming or is it beginning to cool?
This is not an easy book to read. Frankly the scope of the science covered in the book is staggering. I will definitely re-read portions if not all of the book. But, because of the clarity of Solomon's language and the importance of the content he has amassed, I will. As scientist, myself, I am very impressed with what Mr. Solomon has done here. Even though this book's mission is to elucidate the view point of the skeptics, I believe this synthesis will help scientists and the public on both sides of the issue.
The book challenges, at the core, the case for man's impact on global warming as a consequence carbon dioxide emissions. Questions are raised as to whether the earth is actually warming. It is pointed out that the temperature record stations are un-representative of the earth's surface with the ocean being under-represented, and that measurements considered to be most representative (satellite-mounted microwave sounding units -- MSU) have not shown a record of warming since initiated in 1979.
There are critical comments about the management and agenda of the IPCC. The IPCC is self described as: "... a scientific inter governmental body set up by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)" from the IPCC web site. In this book the IPCC stands accused of changing and dictating the conclusions of the scientists doing the work in their own organization.
 Science is not Consensus March 24, 2008
31 out of 74 found this review helpful
One of the major problems faced by the common man (or woman) is to understand that science is not established by consensus. Certainly, once a theory has been studied and restudied over and over again, a consensus of opinion does develop and scientists will develop a common thought-process. The problem we face with Global-Warming and the possibility that Mankind's activities are responsible in some way for this phenomenon is that the theory is being driven by a group of idealistic pseudo-scientists who have convinced themselves that science can be made by observations alone - that there is no need to question anomalous results and all work should focus on removing such discrepancies. For example: there is no doubt that the level of CO2 in the atmosphere is correlated with the mean temperature of the atmosphere, but what is in dispute (in my opinion) is which is the cause and which is the effect? CO2 does increase the energy absorbing ability of the atmosphere - this is also not in dispute. So one could conclude that CO2 increase is the cause and temperature increase is the effect. But there is also extremely reliable and believable evidence that the temperature of the atmosphere is correlated to the intensity of solar radiation which also fluctuates over time. If this is the true cause of global-warming, then the increase in CO2 levels is being driven by the higher transfer of CO2 from the earth's oceans as they are heated up by this inceased energy input from the sun and so the ocean's ability to dissolve CO2 declines thus releasing the gas to the atmosphere at higher rates. If this theory is correct, then CO2 increase is the effect, temperature is a sub-change(both a cause and an effect) while solar radiation is the root cause.
In any event, it appears that global-warming is a real phenomena - that it is now a given - and the effect of this trend on our lives will be significant. What to do about the trend is the focus of both scientists and politicians as we try to adjust to these new climate realities. If we find a way to quickly reduce Greenhouse Gases in the atmosphere, this could compensate for the warming trend - so the move to control carbon emissions is a good first approach to the potential problem provided the costs are tolerable in comparison to the cost of doing nothing - loss of coastal land due to flooding, increased weather extremes due to rapid short-term atmospherics pressure changes, impact of higher temperatures on changes in species diversification (pine-beetle, etc.), etc.
So, in the same way that the IPCC is using consensus to argue the issue, this book is also seeking to find consensus on the other side of the issue which is just as wrong. Instead, what is needed is a cold and calculated systems-approach to the problem of global-warming and to the formulation of possible solutions that come at the issues with totally unemotional and dispassionate viewpoints. The facts need to be examined by the experts and the pros and cons discussed in a forum of openness and collective wisdom. To judge those who oppose the theory of anthropogenic emissions of Greenhouse Gases causing Global-Warming as being charlatans or "in the pockets of big-oil" is counter-productive to the scientific approach to problem-solving. While it is good to seek out "experts", what we need to hear is their reasons for thinking the way they do - not the fact that they are experts opposed to consensus-thinking.
 As seen on C-SPAN April 27, 2008
26 out of 60 found this review helpful
I just saw Solomon's presentation on C-SPAN. While he recognizes that global warming may pose a problem, he points out that there is not an absolute consensus. It's a shame that the Competitive Enterprise Institute sponsored his talk, as their positions are often dismissed as public relations efforts from the fossil fuel industry.
Solomon expressed a great deal of concern over the effects of some of the responses to global warming. He cited the "cap and trade" program which has led to the purchase of massive eucalyptus plantations which are forcing small farmers off their land and levelling forests of biodiversity. The film Refugees of the Blue Planet goes into the sad details of monoculture tree farms. Solomon is also deeply concerned about the resurgence of nuclear energy, which he sees as economically unsound; plus, there is the unresolved issue of what to do with the waste. Although, a segment of the series E2: Energy covers some of the advances in nuclear technology.
To his credit, Solomon suggests that we need to hear more from the poorer nations of the Global South as to how we should address these issues. Some poorer nations want to be able to rapidly develop their own fossil fuel economies, while others prefer that their gas and oil resources be exploited at a conservative pace, if at all. The Price of Fire: Resource Wars and Social Movements in Bolivia
There is a great deal about the natural world that we don't understand. Hopefully, global warming won't cause a catastrophe, and it's comforting that some scientists are not concerned. It would be helpful to see more head-to-head debates between the deniers and the "alarmists." In addition to his C-SPAN appearance, I've heard Solomon on a few right-wing talk shows and would like to see him challenged by people like Ross Gelbspan, author of Boiling Point: How Politicians, Big Oil and Coal, Journalists, and Activists Have Fueled a Climate Crisis--And What We Can Do to Avert Disaster. Gelbspan regularly confronts the deniers, and he has some powerful counter-arguments, and reveals the investment in perception management campaigns by Exxon and others to protect their markets and profits. Everything's Cool
Lastly, as with terrorism, we don't know if or when climate change may bring disaster, but it would be prudent to take precautions. Developing renewable energy that emits fewer greenhouse gasses and doesn't involve the impacts of mining coal Big Coal: The Dirty Secret Behind America's Energy Future and oil drilling can be seen as a "pre-emptive" strike against a potential threat. The booming field of Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution not only provides a less degraded environment, but also enhances the profits that all sorts of businesses are already realizing.
Green to Gold: How Smart Companies Use Environmental Strategy to Innovate, Create Value, and Build Competitive Advantage
A couple other resources on the economic, technological and social transformations already taking place:
Sustainable Industries
Big Ideas for a Small Planet: Season 1 (2pc)
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
