Customer Reviews


7 Reviews
5 star:
 (3)
4 star:
 (1)
3 star:    (0)
2 star:    (0)
1 star:
 (3)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


67 of 75 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Not Absolute Rubbish
I spent 31 years working with the Meteorological Service of Canada. I am sick to death of people with virtually no knowledge of climatology dismissing the work of distinguished scientists with ad hominem arguments and accusations of denial.

There are hundreds of very distinguished atmospheric scientists who do not subscribe to the view that climate change is...
Published on March 1 2008 by Boyd Jahnke

versus
14 of 56 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Unscientific and sloppy
The thesis of this book is that the present period of global warming is part of a natural cycle that has a period of about 1500 years, and has little or nothing to do with greenhouse gases. The authors think that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has got it all wrong, and that efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are a wasted effort that will cost...
Published on Feb. 16 2008 by David Huntley


Most Helpful First | Newest First

67 of 75 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Not Absolute Rubbish, March 1 2008
By 
Boyd Jahnke (Edmonton, Alberta, Canada) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years (Paperback)
I spent 31 years working with the Meteorological Service of Canada. I am sick to death of people with virtually no knowledge of climatology dismissing the work of distinguished scientists with ad hominem arguments and accusations of denial.

There are hundreds of very distinguished atmospheric scientists who do not subscribe to the view that climate change is anthropogenic and thousands of others working in the field who agree with them. Their work is published in the journal Nature, the Journal of the AMA, the Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society and in a host of other scientific journals and in many books. People like Lindzen, Landsea, Wingham, Kirkby, Dyson, Solanki, Tsonis, Kininmonth, Leroux, Christy, Jaworowski, Carter, Gray, Bryson, Segalstad, Svensmark, Abdussamatov, Ollier, Michaels, Motl, Soon, McKitrick and a host of others have offered very convincing evidence that climate change is something that is driven by natural processes.

Richard Lindzen from MIT is probably the most distinguished climatologist in the world. He is a recipient of the AMS's Meisinger, and Charney Awards, and AGU's Macelwane Medal (likely the only man ever to win all three). He is a member of the NRC Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, and a Fellow of the AAAS1. He is a consultant to the Global Modeling and Simulation Group at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, and a Distinguished Visiting Scientist at Caltech's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and has been both a lead author and a reviewer for the IPCC. Dr. Lindzen is willing to debate with anyone, anywhere regarding the anthropogenic view. No one has been able to answer his compelling arguments and few are now willing to debate him because the evidence against the view that CO2 is driving climate change has become irrefutable in its magnitude. He has no relationship with the oil industry and sits on the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Human Rights. He is in complete agreement with Dr. Singer.

Dr. Singer is also a distinguished scientist. He is the first Director of the U.S. National Weather Satellite Service, and was for five years the Vice-Chair of the U.S. National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmospheres. He is the founding Dean of the School of Environmental and Planetary Sciences at the University of Miami and is Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science at the University of Virginia and Distinguished Research Professor at George Mason University. He has published more than 400 technical papers in a wide variety of professional journals.

If there is ignorance in this debate, it lies with those who refuse to answer the scientific case that professional climatologists like Dr. Singer and other atmospheric scientists make against the anthropogenic view. I welcome an honest review of the scientific arguments that Singer offers but please stop the ad hominem slanders.

Two other books written by distinguished scientists offering much sound evidence are:

Climate Change: A Natural Hazard by William Kinninmonth (Multi-Science Publshing ~ Essex). Kinninmonth was Director of the National Climate Centre of Australia and Australia's delegate to the WMO Commission for Climatology. He coordinated the United Nations Task Force on El Nino and has served on WMO expert working groups.

Global Warming: Myth or Reality by Marcel Leroux (Springer-Verlag ~ Berlin). Dr. Leroux is Directeur du Labratoire de Climatologie, Risques Natuels, Environnement at the Universite Jean Moulin in Lyons and is one of Europe's leading climatological researchers.

Why don't we agree to evaluate the scientific arguments on the basis of the science and stop attacking and dismissing people on the basis of their supposed motivations and associations? After all, the truth will be found in the science, not in the motives of proponents whichever side they support.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


32 of 38 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars out of their league, Oct. 13 2008
This review is from: Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years (Paperback)
The only "immoral propaganda" and "rubbish" so far are to be found in two of the negative comments on this book.

Leftist ideologues are easily recognizable by
a) their vicious intolerance for views opposing their own, thus demonstrating complete ignorance of the scientific method
b) their illusion that ad hominem smears are an argument and acceptable substitute for reasoned rebuttal of facts
c) their Chicken Little sky-is-falling catastrophe of the week excitability and
d) their overwhelming hubris admonishing a giant in a field they know nothing about and suppressing his work. One reviewer and his librarian mother actually took it on themselves to denounce a distinguished scientist such as Dr. Singer and possibly divert his book from the library shelves on the basis of their unspecified "research", presumably reading junk science sites.

Librarians who think it's their job to cull books on the basis of their personal ideology should be fired. Book censors should not be running libraries.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


6 of 7 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Global Warming, as produced by the Sun, Aug. 3 2009
By 
M. Yakiwchuk (Edmonton, Alberta Canada) - See all my reviews
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years (Paperback)
In this book, S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery - both distinguished climate scientists - make a convincing case for the 1,500-year solar-driven climate cycle. The authors meticulously summarize the evidence supporting a Sun-driven 1,500-year climate cycle, using references largely from peer-reviewed sources (e.g. scientific journals, etc.) Carbon Dioxide or CO2 emissions are demonstrated to be a lagging indicator of climate change. In other words, CO2 levels tend to rise several hundred years AFTER global warming takes place, as opposed to being the drivers of global warming. This is an important scientific discovery, and the authors deserve approbation for making this point crystal clear to the non-scientist.

While Singer and Avery are in their element summarizing the evidence in favor of a solar-driven 1,500-year climate cycle, they are less convincing when talking about some of the possible side effects of global warming. In particular, I find Chapter 12 (titled "Human Deaths") less than entirely convincing. While the authors are careful to marshall the evidence demonstrating that, all else being equal, warmer weather kills fewer people than a proportionate decrease in temperature, I am not nearly as convinced that the spread of diseases would not be greater in a warmer climate. After all, we know from high school biology that bacteria and germ growth are greatest in a warm, humid environment. And this is precisely the environment which would exist in more of the world, as global warming increases.

Deaths from disease aside, the other major global warming fears - those of rising sea levels, more extreme weather patterns, species extinction, and famine and drought - are convincingly proved by the authors to be largely baseless. On each of the above counts, Singer and Avery draw both on their knowledge and experience as climate scientists, as well as Mr. Avery's extensive knowledge of agricultural and environmental issues. Overall, global warming will have a positive impact in each of the above areas - moderating weather patterns, increasing biodiversity, and providing a more temperate global cimate in which to grow food crops.

Avery and Singer are at their best writing about what they know: The environment, agriculture, and climate science. They are less convincing writing about human health, disease, and other medical issues.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


41 of 51 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Can we help it?, Jan. 7 2008
By 
This is an excellent book proposing that global warming is caused by natural phenomena and will happen, no matter what we do. Instead of trying to fight it, we might as well accept it and deal with its consequences. Plenty of research shows that there have been underlying cycles, such as a 1500-year cycle in global warming (it was warmer at the time of the Romans, than it is now; the sun is now 30% brighter than it was at the time the Earth was formed, etc.). It is a refreshing counter-argument to all the present hype and brings some sanity into the discussion.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


14 of 56 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Unscientific and sloppy, Feb. 16 2008
By 
David Huntley - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years (Paperback)
The thesis of this book is that the present period of global warming is part of a natural cycle that has a period of about 1500 years, and has little or nothing to do with greenhouse gases. The authors think that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has got it all wrong, and that efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are a wasted effort that will cost us lots. The natural cycle is attributed to variations in cosmic ray intensities caused by the sun. The style of the book is that of a diatribe with some hype.
The topic of the book is the science. Climate change, sea levels, extinction of species, geological records, the Kyoto protocol, the sun-climate connection and so on are all discussed. There are over 500 references to document the statements.
I have much to complain about with this book. Firstly there are several places where the authors are sloppy; for example there is a section titled ‘Climate Change reflected in Art and Fish” which has no mention of fish. Another example occurs when after a discussion of invertebrates one reads “New photographs were taken ...” - but later one finds the photographs were of the Arctic coast, not invertebrates. A glossary is provided, but is full of inaccuracies.
Secondly, though this book is about science, there are numerous references to newspaper articles. Some are justified in their context, but those that are used to document a scientific observation are not.
Thirdly the science and scientific arguments are sometimes poorly presented. One can not prove anything in science, but one can do much better than in this book. There is a dearth of hard data and graphs to illustrate the points. Science requires numbers, and these are sadly lacking. I would have loved to see a graph showing both the Mann ‘hockey stick’ temperature vs time graph and that derived from the same data by the two Canadian scientists who took the trouble to analyze the same data.
Fourthly, one needs to be careful about accepting what is written. I did not do much checking, but I found errors. For example, in Figure 9.1 a period around 3000 years ago is incorrectly labeled “Holocene Optimum”and the text states the climate ‘..began to warm again after 1920.’ whereas the Figure clearly shows warming starting about AD1700 (which contradicts the thesis); worse still, if one looks at the data in the original paper one would not make any such statement because of the relatively large fluctuations in them.
I have great sympathy when the authors occasionally take aim at published work and point out what was wrong with it and wonder why it got published. Much of the work related to climate science is done by people without a background in the hard sciences; my own experience is that most of them are poor scientists. Peer review doesn’t work well because the reviewers are often from the same pool. Thus, unfortunately, much ‘junk science’ gets published. It is hard work filtering out the bad from the good. It is also unfortunate that the authors are also guilty of junk science; they do not provide a convincing case or even present it in a logical scientific manner.
But what of the main thesis? There is growing evidence of the effect of sun activity on the intensity of cosmic rays, and the effect of cosmic rays on climate, mainly due to the efforts of Svensmark and Shaviv. In IPCC4 this was dismissed as ‘ambiguous’ and evidently not taken seriously. I think that was a mistake, and I am sure we have not heard the end of it.
In conclusion, the book is sloppy both in the way it is written and the ‘science’ that is put forth. No one should conclude from it that global warming is not due to increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The lists of references will be a useful source for anyone interested in pursuing the subject.
David Huntley, January 2008
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


9 of 56 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Immoral propoganda. Author is an oil industry puppet., March 1 2008
By 
Clara C. Whitman (Nova Scotia, Canada) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
My mother, who is a librarian, recieved a copy of this book free in the mail, along with a sleazy promotional letter from an organization she knew to be funded by oil companies. Suspicious, we read through the book and did a little background reasearch on the authors.

This book's author (Singer) is a notorious rogue. He has been outed for citing non-existant journalistic articles and data to support his theories. Much more of the "data" and the supposed "research" he writes about were collected and conducted by groups POSING as environmental organizations. These organizations are actually developed and funded by oil companies (including Exxon) with the express purpose of misleading the public.

Clever scientists can twist amd misrepresent data to present pretty much any false theories they please. Unfortunately, the average person can easily be fooled.

The authors fail to even address the topic of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (presumably because this would jeopardize their platform), which seems strange for a book on global warming.

We would all love to believe this book, because is "lets us off the hook" to go on with our oil consumption (a least until the oil runs out). Unfortuantely, it is a disgusting misrepresentation of the facts.

Please! Do not support this propoganda!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


8 of 57 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Absolute Rubbish, Feb. 21 2008
This review is from: Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years (Paperback)
This is denialism at its best. Reading through this sloppy excuse for a diatribe against the overwhelming scientifc evidence in support of anthropogenic climate change was difficult at best. Make sure you check out where these people get their funding from. Mr. Singer, in a previous life was paid by the Tobacco industry and suprisingly determined that there were no ill affects from smoking. He has also been paid by the Oil and Coal industries for work so it should be no surprise that he finds global warming suspect. I wish I could give "negative" star ratings because this contributes to disinformation and increased ignorance.

There is no "balanced" opinion anymore on anthropogenic climate change. There is only a small contingent of Oil and Coal industry supported denialists who get far too much air time. This is one of these. Spend your money on something better.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years
Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years by Dennis Avery (Paperback - Oct. 22 2007)
CDN$ 23.95 CDN$ 17.29
In Stock
Add to cart Add to wishlist
Only search this product's reviews