countdown boutiques-francophones Learn more vpcflyout Home All-New Kindle Music Deals Store sports Tools

Customer Reviews

4.3 out of 5 stars
4.3 out of 5 stars
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on January 11, 2004
Many professors of Climate Science realize that carbon dioxide generated by human activity has caused little or no global warming. Essex and McKitrick, even as outsiders to the field, provide the most entertaining exposé of climate modeling nonsense I have seen. The flaws in climate modeling, the absence of
water vapor as the most important greenhouse gas in most enviro manifestoes, the fraud behind the "hockey stick" graph of temperature over the last 1,000 years that claims that the 20th century has been the warmest of the millenium, and the lack of coverage of the remaining ground temperature measurement
stations are all revealed, and backed with citations to peer-reviewed journals. Even the dynamics of human group polarization are explained at length as the reason why this subject receives almost no serious scientific discussion.
The hockey stick temperature vs. time graph was defended by its perpetrator (Mann). A new peer-reviewed article defends the work in the book and amplfies it: Stephen McIntyre and Ross
McKitrick.Corrections to the Mann et al (1998) Proxy Data Base and Northern Hemisphere Average Temperature Series. Energy and Environment 14(6) 751-772. This is one of the few journals on climate that will consider articles with the facts: there is no correlation, as the books shows, with CO2 levels and lower atmosphere temperatures. [...]
The views in the book are supported by other authors in the books Hot Talk, Cold Science; Fragile Science; Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths; and The Skeptical Environmentalist.
0Comment| 15 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 22, 2003
Prior to reading Taken by Storm I considered myself well-informed about the topic of global climate change.I was surprised at how much more this book was able to explain. Essex and McKitrick do an excellent job of outlining the basic science, underlying math and pervasive lack of true understanding that underpins the issue of gloabl warming.Their tone is non-judgemental, unequivocal and principled. They ask fundamental intellectual questions, explain concepts using accessible examples and highlight how good science has been lost. It is a must read for anyone seeking insights about climate change and the broader interplay of politics and science.
0Comment| 13 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on January 6, 2003
Funny, irreverent. A good look at science and global
warming. With only one year of chem eng under my
belt, I found some of the sections were a bit hard
going. But, on the whole, I found the book quite
accessible. Don't judge the global warming debate
until you've read TAKEN BY STORM.
0Comment| 11 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 18, 2004
Mr. Essex and Mr. McKitrick have written a very impressive critique of the faulty science and pseudoscience behind the global warming theory. Particularly impressive is their explanation of the faulty modeling of the climate by the U.N. working committees. The book demonstrates how the collection of average temperatures is no way to model the climate whose relationships are nonlinear and are in constant disequilibrium. The authors demonstrate the uselessness of the U.N. climate models better than anyone else I have read. The authors to their great credit also expose many of the propaganda devices of the establishment and environmentalist proponents of controlling global warming. Way too many of the media, government and establishment information outlets are controlled by people who uncritically support the global warming hypothesis.
Mr. Essex and Mr. Mckitrick might criticized a bit for their presentation. The authors discuss quite difficult concepts that might well be out of range for the average reader. Even a person like myself who has taken a number of college mathematics courses had to read slowly and carefully several of their chapters. I think the authors should have used gray boxes to carefully explain the more difficult concepts, as is done in some science textbooks. For less experienced readers the book by Michaels and Balling (The Satanic Gases) might be a clearer exposition.
But the work is still stupendous.
0Comment| 7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 3, 2002
This is the best-written, most entertaining, most important Science book I've read in over 40 years! The authors draw on statistical theory, chaos theory, computer modelling, masses of scientific data and a whole lot of common sense to completely devastate the whole idea of "global warming" and any attempts to observe it, predict it or influcence it. They also wade into the issue of why this "Chicken Little" idea has gained such a grip on our politicians (and our purse strings).
Only problem: I suspect this would be a tough read for anyone who doesn't have a strong science, math and statistics background. Even though I do have such a background, I found myself deciphering the "dummed down" versions into the real theory in order to understand what they were talking about. It all rang true to me, but I'm not sure someone who didn't have access to the "real" math would be convinced.
0Comment| 28 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on November 20, 2004
In my attemps to grasp the core issues around the science and politics of global warming I have stumbled upon a very enlightening book. The book covers a variety topics from the current connection between facts, science, politics, and policy, to the the concept of uncertainty in existing climate technology. It is not overly ambitious in the scientific concepts it presents to readers who are at least aware of the current global warming discussion, and it remains respectful to the field of climate science. Overall, a fun read and a reminder to the world of science that life is unpredictable, non-linear, and has infinite outcomes.
0Comment| 4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 5, 2014
How is it possible for President Obama to claim that there is now “consensus” behind global warming (excuse me, “climate change") and that the science behind climate change is “settled”, when there are some 19,000 scientists who disagree with the idea? several hundred of these are in fields of expertise directly that bear directly on climate research. The science is not only far from settled, as explained in this important work, it is rather weak, based almost entirely on computer climate models that are incapable of rendering accurate predictions about future “global” temperatures, when they a) do not agree with each other and b) must have their underlying numerical parameters adjusted until they give the “right” answer, namely an annual increase of temperature.

Essex and McKitrick offer an interesting explanation of how this situation has resulted from a self-perpetuating process that involves a rather small number of scientists at the centre of things, the print and broadcast media, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), politicians and funding agencies. In a colourful meteorological analogy, they call it the “convection of certainty”, that results in a cloud of obfuscation, bad science, name-calling and an agenda of marginalization directed at any scientist who fails to follow the IPCC dictum.

When it comes to public contact with science and the formation of science policy, there is no better preparation for the brave new world of the new millennium than Taken by Storm!

Kee Dewdney
(mathematician & computer scientist)
0Comment| One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on November 5, 2003
As climatologists, these guys may very well be brilliant computer scientists and economists. But when they tell me that temperature doesn't measure anything physical, and that the average temperature of two bodies doesn't mean anything, they betray a gross lack of familiarity with basic physics. I DO have a physics degree and thus can see where these guys are talking nonsense, but a lot of lay people will miss it because the writing is so smooth. Take this book with a big grain of salt. Hell, take it with six pounds of rock halite.
11 comment| 5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 16, 2003
First things first. One of the authors an economist and the other is an applied mathematician. Now I know that this doesn't mean they don't know anything about about global warming, but it doesn't mean they're experts either. Anyone with a general science degree should have the same formal knowledge as the two authors, minus say the thermo background Essex may have.
To deny that global warming is occuring right now is ludicrous. Just go to the Environment Protection Agency website and find the weather patterns for the last century and you can see a definite trend in the temperature rising right now. Whether this is a natural cycle or induced by man is left to be questioned. This is one question that the authors draft dodge for a good portion of the book and when they do address the question, it's drowned in math jargon. I have a math degree and can make sense of it, but if you don't have a math degree this section can be hard to understand.
This book is entertaining, but for all the wrong reasons. I found that some of the arguements and comments in the book where more for comedic relief than anything else. Overall I would say read this book just to find out how pompous the authors are.
11 comment| 6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse