CDN$ 20.76
  • List Price: CDN$ 25.95
  • You Save: CDN$ 5.19 (20%)
FREE Shipping on orders over CDN$ 25.
Usually ships within 3 to 6 weeks.
Ships from and sold by Amazon.ca.
Gift-wrap available.
Quantity:1
Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

Sound and Fury: The Science and Politics of Global Warming Hardcover – Oct 15 1992


See all 2 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Hardcover
"Please retry"
CDN$ 20.76
CDN$ 13.92 CDN$ 0.19

Up to 90% Off Textbooks


Product Details

  • Hardcover: 196 pages
  • Publisher: Cato Institute (Oct. 15 1992)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0932790909
  • ISBN-13: 978-0932790903
  • Product Dimensions: 16.4 x 1.8 x 23.5 cm
  • Shipping Weight: 408 g
  • Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #2,502,965 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars
5 star
1
4 star
0
3 star
0
2 star
0
1 star
0
See the customer review
Share your thoughts with other customers

Most helpful customer reviews

Format: Paperback
In spite of the age of the book, I use this as a supplemental text to teach scientific method: skepticism and the demanding of proof. I find it fascinating that people who have not read the book opt to write a review of it. There are three - all one star - below, under the titles "One Amplified Voice", "Predictable" and "Corporate Propaganda."
Michaels explains that climate, which is defined as 30 years, and not to be confused with weather events, changes continuously. But climate has an estimated five million variables. That gives enough argumentation was to why public policy based on models, especially unproven ones, is a bad idea. Models have ten to three dozen variables. Michaels is proven right by the inaccuracy of predictions of the models, by the time the book came out and even more since. Michaels includes one model annecdote which was to run in reverse: predict what will happen in the next ice age. The bias was so strong, that while Chicago was buried under thousands of feet of ice, the polar ice cap still melted. He also quote a GW proponent when confronted with models' inaccuracy, "The data don't matter." But apparently, the models do matter when they disagree with the data; pure non sequitur.
Michaels leads the reader in layman's terms: why we are so uncertain, and why there is a likely chance to see hemispheric, rather than global warming, why it will probably be seasonal, why gradual warming may be more dangerous than rapid, what we know versus the Popular Vision, and why even if all of this comes to pass, it is not a panacea. I won't give away, or take the space on the former points, but on the last I will. A less hot summers, less cold winters climate would also be a utopia for insects.
Read more ›
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.

Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)

Amazon.com: 10 reviews
8 of 11 people found the following review helpful
An excellent scientific review of Global Warming Data March 9 1999
By A Customer - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Paperback
A momentous dispute continuies between the data-driven climatologists and the modelers, and Patrick Michaels brings that dispute into clear perspective. With painstakingly researched evidence, he persuasively argues against the global warming hysteria. The science is good and the writing style is entertaining, especially if you are skeptical of "the popular vision" or are prepared to listen with an open mind. Recommend highly to everyone, especially politicians, greenpeace folks, and UN representatives to the IPCC.
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful
Spectacular March 9 2000
By Niels Hayden - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Hardcover
I Read "Sound and Fury" and I just can't wait for his second book, entitled "Satanic Gases" to hit the shelves. The first was a well written book that ignores the media hype and gives the readers the facts. Keep up the good work!
6 of 9 people found the following review helpful
The "critics" below have not read this book. May 15 2004
By A Customer - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Paperback
In spite of the age of the book, I use this as a supplemental text to teach scientific method: skepticism and the demanding of proof. I find it fascinating that people who have not read the book opt to write a review of it. There are three - all one star - below, under the titles "One Amplified Voice", "Predictable" and "Corporate Propaganda."
Michaels explains that climate, which is defined as 30 years, and not to be confused with weather events, changes continuously. But climate has an estimated five million variables. That gives enough argumentation was to why public policy based on models, especially unproven ones, is a bad idea. Models have ten to three dozen variables. Michaels is proven right by the inaccuracy of predictions of the models, by the time the book came out and even more since. Michaels includes one model annecdote which was to run in reverse: predict what will happen in the next ice age. The bias was so strong, that while Chicago was buried under thousands of feet of ice, the polar ice cap still melted. He also quote a GW proponent when confronted with models' inaccuracy, "The data don't matter." But apparently, the models do matter when they disagree with the data; pure non sequitur.
Michaels leads the reader in layman's terms: why we are so uncertain, and why there is a likely chance to see hemispheric, rather than global warming, why it will probably be seasonal, why gradual warming may be more dangerous than rapid, what we know versus the Popular Vision, and why even if all of this comes to pass, it is not a panacea. I won't give away, or take the space on the former points, but on the last I will. A less hot summers, less cold winters climate would also be a utopia for insects. Note that Michaels does not speak with certainty but in reasoning and probability of proper science. This quite the opposite of the non- and anti-scientific method types with their absolutes, best understood as proselytism.
Michaels is also quite polite. For example, The Challenger shuttle disaster was in 1987. Congress was questioning all aspects of NASA, and future funding of it in 1988. NASA, before Congress, tin cup in hand, was in trouble and proposed needing funding for the study of the probablility of GW as a way to maintain political survival more than scientific. Michaels does not mention Challenger or NASA's predicament. He picks up with the congressional testimony, the sceintifically illiterate media picking up on it - just listen to CNN today - and the birth of the Popular Vision. Michaels acknowledges the strong possibility of some type of warming. Note again three negative reviews that claim he denies it. If one has any interest in the subject of GW or in understanding proper scientific method, I assign this one because I have yet to find another that is better.
Still relevant even now - Michaels blows apart NASA's charlatans Aug. 21 2008
By M. SANCHEZ - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Hardcover
There's nothing quite so loathsome as a government agency that lies to fill its coffers so that it can engage in junk science efforts. Worse yet is when that agency allows one of its prominent "climatologists" (not his actual field) to become a whore for world enviro-socialism. Yet that was what happened in the late '90s. Fortunately, Dr. Michaels vetted said charlatans, bending their teeth for the world to see. Even massive propaganda efforts by the mainstream media, politicians and celebrities couldn't overturn Michaels' deconstruction of the dubious AGW theories, which, sadly, still persist.
6 of 9 people found the following review helpful
tree huggers, cower in fear Feb. 14 1999
By A Customer - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Hardcover
the previous review shows you how much the greens fear real science. The fact is that the greens misinterpret the sattelite data on purpose because it doesn't fit the political purposes of the movement. Everyone should read this book.
(and as for the part about corporate propoganda: let me remid everyone that argument against authority is just as flawed as argumenmt from authority)


Feedback