PDF Download Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson
To get this book Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson, you could not be so baffled. This is online book Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson that can be taken its soft documents. It is different with the on-line book Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson where you could get a book and afterwards the vendor will certainly send out the published book for you. This is the location where you can get this Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson by online and also after having take care of purchasing, you can download and install Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson on your own.
Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson
PDF Download Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson
Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson. In undergoing this life, lots of people constantly try to do and get the finest. New expertise, encounter, lesson, and every little thing that could improve the life will certainly be done. Nonetheless, many individuals sometimes really feel puzzled to get those points. Really feeling the limited of experience and sources to be far better is among the does not have to have. Nevertheless, there is a really basic thing that could be done. This is just what your teacher always manoeuvres you to do this one. Yeah, reading is the response. Reviewing a publication as this Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson and also various other recommendations could enhance your life quality. How can it be?
Also the cost of an e-book Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson is so inexpensive; lots of people are truly thrifty to reserve their cash to buy the publications. The various other reasons are that they really feel bad as well as have no time to head to guide shop to browse the book Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson to read. Well, this is contemporary age; a lot of publications can be got conveniently. As this Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson and much more books, they could be entered extremely fast means. You will certainly not have to go outside to get this e-book Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson
By seeing this page, you have actually done the best looking factor. This is your beginning to select guide Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson that you want. There are whole lots of referred books to read. When you would like to obtain this Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson as your book reading, you could click the web link web page to download Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson In few time, you have possessed your referred books as your own.
As a result of this publication Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson is sold by on the internet, it will certainly reduce you not to publish it. you can get the soft file of this Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson to save money in your computer system, device, and also much more tools. It relies on your desire where as well as where you will review Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson One that you have to always remember is that reviewing book Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist Looks At The Science Of Climate Change, By G Dedrick Robinson will endless. You will have going to read various other e-book after completing a publication, and it's continually.
“The author makes it very clear that a changing climate is not unusual. It is in fact the norm -- although change is often so slow that humans cannot detect it directly. But historical geologists know how to display the evidence to the public. This may be the single most important contribution of this well-written and fact-filled book.”—Dr. S. Fred Singer, Chairman Science & Environmental Policy Project
“Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics and Deniers is a refreshing read on a topic of great societal importance; refreshing because, unlike many books published on this subject, the authors of this work evaluate key predictions and controversies of the global warming debate using logic and science. Most readers will appreciate the book’s arrangement. Each chapter presents a series of questions and answers that revolve around a central theme. The book is well written and easy to be understood by those with little knowledge or scientific background in the global warming debate.”—Dr. Craig D. Idso, founder and chairman of the board of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change.
“Dr. G Dedrick Robinson comments in his Prologue that: 'As a geologist, I knew that climate has always changed,' and therein lies the core message of this informative book. Writing in an easily accessible style for all readers, and using Socratic dialogue, Robinson leads us systematically through the simple science information that is needed to answer the question, 'Are human carbon dioxide emissions causing dangerous global warming?' And the more surprised you are that the answer to this question is 'no,' then the more you need to read this excellent book.”—Professor Robert M. Carter, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia
“GLOBAL WARMING: ALARMISTS, SKEPTICS AND DENIERS is an excellent, accessible handbook for those interested in the science of global warming. Skeptics have long maintained that the bulk of the science is on their side. Anyone who reads Dr. Robinson's book with an open mind will find it hard not to agree.”—Iain Murray, author of The Really Inconvenient Truths
“GLOBAL WARMING: ALARMISTS, SKEPTICS AND DENIERS is an excellent analysis of the problems of climate science from the perspective of a veteran geologist. Particularly useful are Dr. Robinson's discussion of why climate models often fail, and how today's climate changes, when compared to those of the geological past, are clearly seen as well within natural variation. But there is much more science—enough, I'd think, to persuade all but die-hard global-warming believers that a skeptical position is much truer to the climate evidence than alarmism.”—Paul MacRae, author of False Alarm—Global Warming: Facts Versus Fears gorgeous Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics and Deniers brings a unique geological perspective to this politically charged issue, a perspective that has been ignored far too long. Written by a father-son team of geoscientist and attorney, it is the concise guide to the global warming controversy that has been long needed. As a university professor and research geoscientist for thirty years, Dr. Robinson knows that geological science is essential for placing the global warming controversy in proper prospective. One cannot hope to understand how humans might be causing climate change without an understanding of the magnitude and speed natural processed are capable of when it comes to climate change. Earth history is the only yardstick we have to determine whether recent climate change is unusual or not. Yet, inexplicably, a vast repository of geologic data has been ignored in this contentious issue. Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics and Deniers was written to correct this oversight.
- Sales Rank: #740666 in eBooks
- Published on: 2013-01-16
- Released on: 2013-01-16
- Format: Kindle eBook
Review
Dr. S. Fred Singer, Chairman, Science & Environmental Policy Project, says, "The author makes it very clear that a changing climate is not unusual. It is in fact the norm--although change is often so slow that humans cannot detect it directly. This may be the single most important contribution of this well-written and fact-filled book.
Dr. Craig D. Idso, founder and chairman of the board of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, says the book "...is a refreshing read on a topic of great societal importance...because the authors evaluate key predictions and controversies of the global warming debate using logic and science."
Prof Robert M. Carter, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, says "In an easily accessible style, Robinson leads us through the science information to answer the question, 'Are human carbon dioxide emissions causing dangerous global warming?' The more surprised you are that the answer is 'no,' then the more you need to read this excellent book."
"Excellent, accessible handbook of global warming that shows the bulk of the science is on the side of skeptics."--Iain Murray, author of The Really Inconvenient Truths
Excellent analysis of climate science from a veteran geologist's perspective. Dr. Robinson's discussions of climate models and past climate change are particularly useful. There is much more science, enough to persuade all but die-hard alarmists that a skeptical position better fits the evidence.--Paul MacRae, author of False Alarm--Global Warming
From the Author
As a young geology instructor in the 1970s, I informed my students of satellite images showing expanding snow cover in North America compared to previous years. I advised them to remain skeptical of the claims then being made in the popular media that this heralded the beginning of the next ice age. A few years later, sensationalist articles about the coming ice age began to be replaced by others saying the earth was growing dangerously warm and we humans were to blame. Why the continuing exaggerations about climate change I wondered, but duly brought this new scare to the attention of my classes with the same caveat as before. I thought it was just more media hype that would fade as quickly as the recent ice age scare. I was wrong. Instead of fading, global warming alarmism increased.
As a geologist and student of earth history, I knew that climate has always changed. Some of the changes had been disastrous, such as the mountains of ice that moved into mid-latitudes during cold phases of the great Pleistocene ice age depopulating millions of square miles. Mostly, however they were just inconsequential changes of a degree or two. The warming we were then experiencing seemed just the latest in a large number minor undulations of climate, not unusual and not unexpected after the frigid temperatures that lasted several hundred years during the recently ended Little Ice Age. Yet, people were on TV acted like climate change was unusual, something that hadn't happened before. Obviously, they had never taken a historical geology course.
For a while, not many people promoted such a view, but the few who did knew how to get attention. And other people were listening. Little did I know a mindset had taken root and started to grow.
A great many people, particularly liberal politicians and most journalists, act as if climate change is odd, strange, extraordinary. Part of this belief system seems to be that yesterday's climate, the preindustrial climate, was ideal, the best of all possible climates, the way nature intended it to be. It was good because it was natural, and we prospered. But now we have strayed far from the natural way, and with our meddling, have upset the balance. We are the reason climate is changing and since it is not natural, it is bad. Nature gave us a stable climate, an ideal climate, but we messed it up
I still have trouble coming to grips with this. Do these people not realize that the preindustrial climate was the Little Ice Age chill? Have they not heard of all the crop failures and famine over large areas of Europe? The glaciers moving down into villages, the frozen rivers, the ice-choked harbors? The year without a summer when snow fell in New England during each summer month? The slow starvation of the Viking villages in Greenland?
My answer is that either they do not know these things because they were never exposed to historical geology, or they ignore it in favor of ideology. They either do not know what came before or don't care.
The new climate alarmism that is an offshoot of the green movement, a movement I understand and in some ways, sympathize with. I became a geologist because I love the grandeur of nature and the outdoors and hate the stifling congestion of cities. However these global warming people turned it all around. Staid and unchanging is not nature's way. The most basic thing about the earth, the first thing geologists learn, is that the only thing constant in nature is change. It can be at such a languid pace that, even over one's full lifetime, it's hard to detect, but it can also be catastrophic. Whether hare or tortoise, geologic change can't be stopped, yet it seemed to me that's what global warming alarmists sought.
Earth history clearly teaches that a static earth has never existed. Our planet is one of the most active bodies in the solar system. All kinds of things constantly change, including weather patterns and climate. Still, natural change does not preclude the possibility that human activities might also cause change. Perhaps, I thought, my own predisposition toward natural change was preventing me from impartially assessing the global warming theory. Maybe powerful evidence supported it. With this in mind, I began to study the scientific literature. To my surprise, I found very little direct evidence that humans were influencing climate. Most of what was offered as evidence was based on the predictions of computer climate models, rather than actual observed data or experimental results. It was as if a weather forecast saying sunny skies for the weekend had been elevated to a greater importance than the rain that actually fell. What was going on here?
Geologists apply the principle of uniformity to learn about earth history. It has proven to be a reliable guide for what is likely to happen in the future. For global warming alarmists, instead of the past that is living, it's the future. All their dire warnings are based on computer climate model predictions of things that might or might not happen.
To geologists like me, something vital is missing in this procedure, what we know happened in the past. A vast amount of this sort of data is available, but computer models use none of it to churn out their predictions. Real information, won at great cost and effort, is ignored in favor of predictions. This is not how science is supposed to work. I learned during my years in graduate school that many things in science are important, but above all is the data. We must honor the data, treat it impartially, let it lead us where it will, allow it to illuminate our way toward better theories. This is the only path that will lead to the light of real knowledge, real progress. This new method of science elevates computer predictions above real data. If the data doesn't agree with the computer forecast, then something must be wrong with the data. Better check it again and find out what's wrong.
Along with my discovery that a paucity of evidence supporting global warming was being hyped and stretched almost beyond belief came the realization that studies running counter to the theory were being ignored. Even worse, an entire group of scientists were not being heard, geologists, the very people who have the most knowledge about earth history. The science with the knowledge that should be most helpful in predicting future trends in climate was being ignored. Meteorologists, climatologists, physicists, chemists, biologists, even economists and politicians were making their view known, but where were the geologists?
I finally decided that this oversight needed correcting. This book is the result.
My goal in writing it is to summarize the science of global warming in a way that is understandable to ordinary people. For those desirous of learning more, references to cited peer-reviewed articles are provided. Throughout, I take a geologic point of view, intentionally elevating data above predictions and forecasts, for this is what has made the scientific method so successful in advancing the human condition. I do not discuss the politics of global warming, the economics, the merits of any particular policy direction or any point of view intentionally meant to favor one political party over another, whether liberal or conservative. Plenty of other books cover these topics.
There might be those who say I have failed at one or more of my objectives because they do not like what I say, while others might recommend the book because they do like my viewpoint. This is the unfortunate result of turning an important scientific question into a political piñata. Science and politics mix even worse than oil and water. Each needs to be kept in its cage completely isolated from the other. This is perhaps the most important lesson of the entire global warming controversy. It is in everyone's interest to try to keep it from happening again.
From the Back Cover
In an easy-to-understand question and answer format requiring no background in science, all the main arguments advocates make in support of global warming are examined and found wanting. Without attacking anyone's politics and documenting all its conclusions with references to scientific literature, the book is the most concise guide to the global warming controversy any scientist has written.
Most helpful customer reviews
9 of 10 people found the following review helpful.
Thought provoking presentation of the "deniers'" case
By William C. Mead
Please note: This is a book review. I will neither address the larger issues of global warming nor attempt to defend a position on the issue as a whole. Please read this review as one experienced PhD physicist's evaluation of this particular book.
From the title, I thought this might be a fairly balanced book, but with a little reading, it is obviously one-sided. The content is tightly focused on building a case against Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). I found the scientific content interesting, thought provoking, and somewhat credible. The technical content is well chosen and explained at a level that can be appreciated by thinking laymen and non-specialist scientists. The writing is very well organized and clear.
The book is written by a geologist who has extensive knowledge of the history of the broadest aspects of climate over a vast period of Earth's history. As a result, one of the author's major thrusts is that the AGW camp (the "alarmists"), including most climate scientists, scientific and funding institutions, politicians, and media have ignored the trove of geological climate knowledge, and that this knowledge has much to say about the future of Earth's climate. The author carries his argument further, presenting a view of recent data that indicates the warming trend that extended into the 1990's has at least been interrupted, and perhaps ended.
Re. the viewpoint. In the Preface, Robinson admits to starting from a point of skepticism that mankind can influence the climate. After his research into the question, he finds, "Along with my discovery that a paucity of evidence supporting global warming was being hyped and stretched almost beyond belief came the realization that studies running counter to the theory were being ignored. Even worse, an entire group of scientists were not being heard, geologists, the very people who have the most knowledge about earth history." [Kindle Locations 255-258] So, the author is strongly in the "denier" faction, and the book is cast in the mold of here's what the alarmists claim, and here's the honest and correct science of the deniers.
The overall format of the book is to phrase a question as if it were being asked by someone who has read "alarmist" claims. Then, the question is answered according to a geologist's data, and the answer nearly always "disproves" the claim.
The author broadly criticizes the basic approach and tools assembled by climate scientists (of all disciplines-- except geologists, who have, he says, been ignored by the field), especially basic science (since we don't know everything) and computer modeling (since it has not been tested against all the "data" of the past). Robinson asserts that his own field's historical-geological data is an important way to address climate issues.
Aside from the author's position in the denier/alarmist spectrum, his position in the physical sciences noticeably contrasts with those of this physicist. Robinson states:
-
"Throughout, I take a geologic point of view, intentionally elevating data above predictions and forecasts, for this is what has made the scientific method so successful in advancing the human condition." [Kindle Locations 263-265]
-
The author's viewpoint is forged by how his branch of geology has advanced, namely, by careful collection of historical data. As a physicist, I would claim that the tools proven to be successful in advancing the human condition include experiment, theory, numerical solutions, physical models, and computer simulations. At different times and in different situations, one of these components might lead the advance. But, it is the interplay among these tools that gives confidence to applications of the knowledge. Data alone can be uninformative or misleading, and is seldom helpful in making predictions. Theory alone can become disconnected from reality. Models and simulations are often useful for making meaningful comparisons between theory and experimental data. Without such comparisons, models can be misleading, since important processes can easily be misrepresented or omitted. If the combined process is successful, understanding and predictive capabilities emerge.
Re. the science. Most of the data Robinson presents arises from geoclimate studies over time scales from hundreds to millions of years. He compares historical conditions to those of the present and shows that the climate has always shown natural variations. This seems obvious and indisputable to me. The conditions we observe today lie within the range of geological variations. Interestingly, the CO2 levels we see today are much lower than those in the early atmosphere and the global temperatures are higher. This indicates that a runaway greenhouse effect is unlikely. He also shows data indicating that CO2 levels tend to respond to climate changes hundreds of years after the change occurs instead of leading and determining warming trends.
The book discusses the various natural sources of greenhouse gases and the physics of how the various gases affect radiative heat loss from the Earth into space. If you simply add up the natural stored amounts of CO2, they greatly exceed the amount in the atmosphere. Therefore, the effects of these stored amounts on the atmosphere's composition depend on the exchanges that occur between stored and released forms. These exchange processes appear to be understood only qualitatively. Robinson also points out convincingly that water vapor is an important (dominant?) greenhouse gas, and that the hydrologic cycle is not understood in a very quantitative way. The effects of changes in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere can be either amplified or reduced by consequential changes in water vapor, clouds, and ice.
On the interesting question of what is happening to the world's ice, Robinson argues that the balance of ice melting and creation in Antarctica favors increase in the ice mass, in spite of melting at the edges. Measurements of ice mass are very difficult, so this would seem to be a debatable point.
This book, like others by deniers, takes some pains to complain about ad hominem attacks by alarmists against deniers. At the same time, Robinson advances his own ad hominem attacks against specific alarmists and institutions. He especially aims at Al Gore, politicians in general, and the mainstream press. I do not doubt his claims that the advocates of AGW have the upper hand in the science funding, political, and public relations spheres of influence, but I find this conspiracy theory tiresome.
Robinson's reliance on junkscience dot com is stronger than I think is justified. On the other hand, he cites numerous refereed publications. I cannot evaluate the accuracy with which he represents the research that he draws from, but he maintains what I consider a plausible level of credibility. His statements of the positions offered by the "alarmists" seem to be faithful to talking points in the public discussion. Short of being an expert in the field or performing a large amount of independent research, I don't see how the reader can determine the credibility of the book's claims. My concerns for credibility of the book come from the same source as that of the advocates of AGW: the overall strong bias can easily result in both knowing and unconscious distortions.
There seem to me to be some serious limitations of the technical approaches Robinson advocates. 1) He regards data as the ultimate in reality. This is true to an extent, but data is seldom complete or purely black and white. Measurements from satellite and proxy data involve a great deal of analysis. This analysis can introduce errors, so the data must be used judiciously. 2) His suggestion of using geoclimate data to test simulations is quite limited because there is so little detail in our knowledge of ancient Earth (I do, however, think that this approach should be pursued in research efforts). Modern data provides a much more localized but detailed set of measurements to test simulations, though unfortunately over a short interval. 3) An over-emphasis on data offers little predictive capability. 4) Careful attention must be paid to potential differences in the behavior of climate over long and short time scales. I think Robinson is a bit cavalier in mixing short and long time scales in his arguments.
At this time, the book is not available in printed form from Amazon. Kindle's capabilities are not always well used or suitable for technical publications. Some of the figures are difficult to read while others are impossible. Magnifying the figures is not possible within Kindle for PC. Magnifying the pictures using Windows' feature does not improve the readability, except the pixels become clearer.
Taken as a whole, I think this book is a useful contribution for people who wish to think about it carefully. Much of the content has already become sound bites for deniers in the shallow public "debate". This book adds enough meat to help the reader see the basis for many of the sound bites.
8 of 10 people found the following review helpful.
Well researched, and written, I found it to be a informative book
By Finny
As a teacher of geology and Earth science, I found this book to be accurate, well researched, and fair to the topic being discussed.
I read the other reviews prior to purchasing this book, which nearly deterred me from buying it. Some of the other reviews gave me the impression that the book would be bias, poorly researched, or skewed. This turned out to not be the case, and I am glad I purchased it. Everything I read in this book aligns with my own understanding of geology and the Earth sciences. I have a Masters degree and teach courses on these subjects.
One complaint in some of the reviews was that the author refers to those who believe global warming is human caused as "Global Warming Alarmists." He indeed does do this.
However, in fairness, he also refers to those who do not believe global warming is human caused as "Global Warming Skeptics," as well as "Global Warming Deniers."
In other words, the author is not being negative to one or the other groups. He is simply using the terminology of the day, that both groups use for each other. The reviewers point out the one, but fail to point out the other, thus obscuring this balance.
One of the reviewers claimed that the author sounds angry. I did not sense any anger at all. His writing is straight forward, reasonable, and level headed. He does a very good job of keeping emotion out of the book. Other than using humor here and there. Which I did not find distracting.
I also read in another review of supposed factual errors. As a geologist with years of experience, I did not find any such factual errors. Rather, as I read the other review, I found that the reviewer did not understand what s/he was reading, and that they misstated what the author suggested in the book.
In any event, if like me, you are looking for a thoughtful, fair, well researched, book on global warming, which is based on peer reviewed science, and that presents alternate views on Global Warming then this is a good book for you.
I recommend that everyone strive to understand this topic. Don't believe me, or anyone else. You are smart enough to understand the science for yourself. Read this book, and also read others. It is an important topic! One that is having a profound impact on our culture today.
I will tell you what I tell my students. You are every bit as smart as anyone else. You have the capability to understand this issue. There is ample scientific data. I will not share my bias on this topic. Rather, I will encourage you to read, study, and use logic to come to your own conclusions.
51 of 76 people found the following review helpful.
Standard Denialist Arguments
By Eager Reader
This book purports to be a scientific evaluation of the current consensus hypotheses among climatologists that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is causing rapid global heating. My decision to read the book was based on the hope that Robinson would be a careful, rational skeptic, since I consider myself a tentative supporter and I wanted some honest challenges to my understanding to clarify my thinking. Truly objective discussions on either side of this argument are difficult to find, and unfortunately this book has not turned out to be one of them. The first tip-off that it might not be impartial is that the position of Supporter is not included in the title. I reasoned that that inclusion would make the title unwieldy and less catchy. Not so. This book gets one star because the last thing the world needs is another denier diatribe. Since I have the Kindle version, I will list approximate "location" numbers rather than page numbers. Unlike the other reviewers who rate this book poorly, I have read it carefully and taken notes. I have evaluated the allegations with the best information I could find on each issue.
Robinson begins by setting up a straw man in the Prologue - "liberal politicians and most journalists ... act as if climate change is odd, strange, extraordinary." Now, I haven't met anyone who is unaware of, say, ice ages or the dust bowl. The truth is that the concern is with what appears to be unprecedentedly rapid heating correlated with an unprecedentedly rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration (hereafter [CO2]), not climate change per se. It quickly becomes clear in the next few pages that, for the author, anyone who thinks there is reason to believe in an anthropogenic basis for this concern is, by definition, an alarmist - throughout the book the term "climate change supporter" is never used - it is always "climate alarmist." Robinson's tone throughout is pronounced anger, not rational discourse. This is true of all the denialist books that I have seen. Very discouraging.
In Location 294 we learn that "media hype and ill-informed politicians" keep us in the dark about water being the overwhelming greenhouse gas on earth. The whole point of Chapter 1 is to note that water is the dominant greenhouse gas and that its effects overall are to make the planet inhabitable as though it were the object of some plot to obscure this well-known fact.
Chapter two opens with the statement that "with the election of Barack Obama in 2008 [it is] no surprise [that] the EPA [stated] that carbon dioxide and five other atmospheric gases are pollutants that endanger public health." This plus several complaints about the "liberal press" made me feel like I was reading a piece released by Fox News. So much for keeping politics out of the book (the author's stated position). Any pretense of scientific objectivity is now forfeit.
In location 539 the statement is made that CO2 is a poison "not because it is harmful itself, but because it displaces oxygen." This is flatly wrong. If you displace 10% of the atmosphere with CO2, loss of consciousness and eventual death will occur. Displacement of 10% with any inert gas will have about the same effect as flying from LA to Denver. Now, this has nothing to do with climate change, but it shows how willing the author is to make assertions without checking his facts.
The book is written as a series of questions asked and then answered by the author which works quite well, and the questions in general are good ones posed in a realistic way. The problem is that the answers are generally the usual contrarian diatribe. In cases where it is awkward to answer at all, the question is totally avoided. A good example is in location 2470. The Questioner asks about the "precautionary principle" - if the evidence is inconclusive but the potential damage is extreme, aren't we better off taking corrective action until we get a more conclusive answer. This is a serious philosophical question about risk, probability, timescale (irreversibility), and consequences that deserves to be addressed seriously. Robinson's only response is "Perhaps examples could be cited where acting emotionally rather than rationally has prevented disasters, but on balance, the lesson of history is that rash action causes many more catastrophes than it prevents." Then he is off on some diatribe unrelated to the question.
Standard contrarian distortion, mis/disinformation, misdirection, and illogic are used throughout the book. These include
Extreme overemphasis of uncertainty
Focus on noise in plots rather than overall trends
Claims of failure of models from comparison of results of outdated models (Hanson's 1980's model) to noise (an 8-year trend)in plots rather than comparison of the best latest models to overall trends.
This review is getting too long so I'll stop here. If you are looking for an evenhanded discussion from a neutral position, save your time and money - skip this book.
Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson PDF
Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson EPub
Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson Doc
Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson iBooks
Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson rtf
Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson Mobipocket
Global Warming: Alarmists, Skeptics & Deniers; A Geoscientist looks at the Science of Climate Change, by G Dedrick Robinson Kindle
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar