- ISBN13: 9781594033735
- Condition: NEW
- Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
Product Description
The Great Global Warming Blunder unveils new evidence from major scientific findings that explode the conventional wisdom on climate change and reshape the global warming debate as we know it. Roy W. Spencer, a former senior NASA climatologist, reveals how climate researchers have mistaken cause and effect when analyzing cloud behavior and have been duped by Mother Nature into believing the Earth’s climate system is far more sensitive to human activities and carbo… More >>
The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate Scientists
Spencer is a well-known proponent of the Intelligent Design nonsense. Even though he may have worked for NASA, designing a meteorological sensor system, clearly ‘his’ scientific logic, i.e., his ability to interpret the information he has collected, must be questioned.
To be fair I’m going to admit that I haven’t read this book. However, knowing that the Intelligent Design frauds have a political and religious agenda, as did their scientific creationist predecessors, I’m going to take a leap here and assume that this author applies similar illogic to weather and climate.
Rating: 2 / 5
I made a theory of my own and so far it seems to be proven true. If you dig, just a little into the finances of climate skeptics you’ll see that they somehow benefit from the oil companies in a way more directly that we all do. The science on climate change is science thus, it will take some time, but by that time it will be done. I would listen to the climate scientist, who are at a near consensus on the issue. Also his month to month research, its not great in the least. I think the logic of these meteorologist skeptics(there are a couple) that indirectly work for big oil is that they are doing no wrong in their minds because they believe in the principle that life on earth is temporary anyways so if they are wrong, so what? We could be gone tomorrow anyways. In truth the way we live is not SUSTAINABLE regardless if man-made global warming makes things even worse. So milk it while you can you greedy oil gluts, your time is near an “What the hell were we thinking moment”, and if you aren’t sitting on at least a couple million for your immoral misinformation you’ll be saying; “I don’t know.” I’ll be saying you were killing people. If everyone in the world lived like average Americans do we would need 6 planets worth of resources. 970 million people “At risk of hunger” 2009. California and Australian, drought and fires considered the new Norm to expect. This, you call “natural warming”, it started freakishly close to the industrial revolution, but regardless the current system is not going to stay dependent on oil anyway. I am for; a better quality of life for less of a price, and 970 million hungry people and a billion more on the way is too high a price to be paying (burning). Going Green means more than fighting climate change to me and the greenness, as stupid as it sounds needs to come from the government first(it is coming). It has to make sense to them financially, and when energy prices go back up and they will, that is when we will move. And if somehow they can keep the prices down, I am scared to know about how they were able to do that.Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet
Rating: 1 / 5
Whether you are a believer in man-made climate change, or a skeptic, Roy Spencer presents some intriguing questions in “The Great Global Warming Blunder”. Chief among them – is man really the only explanation for the changes we have seen in the climate over the last 100 years? The real question, however, – and the reason he wrote the book in the first place – is will the scientific “establishment” give his research a fair hearing?
Spencer fully lays out his research and theories in the book. He’s clearly a scientist, not a writer; but what he lacks in style, he makes up for in substance. At its core this book asks a question so elegantly simple that it’s hard to believe it’s never truly been explored before. A question that goes to one of the basic tenets held by most man-made climate change evangelists on the cause and effect nature of temperature change and clouds. How do we know that global warming is causing fewer clouds, rather than fewer clouds causing the global warming?
Think about that for a moment. Spencer postulates that the increase and decrease in cloud cover is not a reaction to the changes in temperature; rather they are contributing factors to the change in the first place. By taking that in to account, his models show that the earth’s climate is rather insensitive to man’s CO2 emissions. Instead, what he sees is a global climate that is mostly indifferent to man. One that responds more to global variations in cloud cover as driven by things like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), El Nino, and La Nina. As he puts it in the book – Earth’s climate “does not particularly care how much we drive SUVs or how much coal we burn for electricity”.
Spencer’s theory will not be without detractors – and that’s okay. All Spencer is really after is a fair hearing in the scientific community, and an objective testing of his research. All too often, however, the global climate change debate has been charged with politics and decisions based on faith, instead of fact. (In fact, British courts recently held that environmental beliefs have the same weight under the law as religious beliefs). We owe it to ourselves to look at all possible explanations for climate change. After all, there have been demonstrable changes in our climate for thousands of years – long before man industrialized. To think that we are the only explanation for what we see now, smacks of hubris.
Read the book and take an objective view of the science Spencer presents. It’s a compelling case. Ask yourself – does the data support what Spencer is claiming? Is Man truly to blame for global warming? Most importantly – make up your mind for yourself. Don’t just accept manmade global warming because there is a “consensus”. Ask questions. Gather information. After all – there used to be a consensus that the Earth was an immovable object at the center of the Universe – until Copernicus showed that it wasn’t. That consensus was vigorously defended by the establishment of the day, and played in to Man’s ego and hubris about his place in the cosmos. Sound familiar?
Rating: 5 / 5
I have done a fair amount of reading during the last 10 years to learn about how our planets climate operates. I now feel as though the missing “key” pieces have been found to the “climate change” puzzle. For ANYONE interested in our climate this book is a “must read”. I would not be surprised if Roy W. Spencer is not the scientist that breaks the hold that the IPCC has on politicians and the media. However we are down to the wire, large sums of money are already being spent world-wide on “fighting climate change”. Let’s give the climate experts about 30 days to review Spencer’s work and provide their feed-back. If this book indeed does get blessed, then I think there should be an all out effort to “educate” the politicians and the “media” regarding the contents of this book. This is a not a general book of information on climate, there are already several excellent books on the market. This book is focused on Roy Spencer’s new research results that literally destroy the IPCC’s computer models that are predicting climate change disaster as the result of mans greenhouse gas contributions to the earths atmosphere. Thank you Mr. Spencer!
Rating: 5 / 5
Roy Spencer brings clarity to a debate that has been clouded by ideology (pun intended). It used to be that the only alternatives to the anthropogenic global warming theory were solar and volcanic activity. This book provides another alterative explanation of climate change. Roy Spencer is known primarily for his work on how climate systems are not as sensitive to C02 as many think. Spencer argues that clouds are a major factor. His idea that the Pacific Decadal Oscillation is a major driver of climate change seems more than plausible. This book makes it obvious, even to a layman (or as Spencer puts it, to an 8th grader), that the AGW theory was never proven beyond doubt, and is now under serious challenge.
This book is important now that Cap and Trade legislation is coming under serious consideration. Proponents of cap and trade tend to assume that the AGW theory is proven beyond any shadow of doubt. Spencer raises more than just doubt over the AGW theory. As Spencer notes, there are larg potential costs associated with cap and trade, and with efforts to restrict the use of fossil fuels in general. We should think very carefully about restructuring tax and regulatory policies according to the unproven AGW theory. Hopefully this book will stimulate thoughtful debate over the causes of climate change. Keep up this excellent work Dr Spencer!
Rating: 5 / 5