Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle Reading App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your email address or mobile phone number.
The author is knowledgeable about his area of expertise; satellite temperature data and the processes that are driving the normal (natural) fluctuations in global temperature. He describes how the traditional means of measuring global temperature with ground stations has been flawed (likely intentionally) and demonstrates how the satellite temperature data record fits the well known natural variability and occillations much better. An honest and successful attempt to let the pure science and unadulterated temperature data speak for us to give us a true sense of the recent global temperatures. Clearly, when politicians and big money get too involved with science it can morph into pseudo-science and become untrustworthy. The author rises above the fray to present us a thoughtful and well-reasoned book worth reading.
The author has published in book form, what is apparently essentially a research paper that he wrote earlier that was rejected by both Science and Nature journals. It should be pointed out that both of these journals are firmly in the anthropogenic global warming camp, and research that does not support that view would usually be rejected by their editors.
The author has reviewed the satellite temperature data, accurate to +/- 0.03 degrees Celsius, in itself far more accurate than ground based thermometers, but the interesting thing he found was that the satellite data show no warming trend from 1978 to 2008, only an oscillation of temperature, cooling and warming, of 0.4 to 0.5 degrees, with a period of 3-5 years. The only exception was 1997 to 1999, which showed significant warming. The author suggests this was due to the appearance of a Super El Nino. He states that, except for that brief warming, the global temperature follows the normal El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) period and pattern, and that it is ENSO that determines the climate change, not CO2. He states that if there is no warming trend, then rising CO2 is not causing any warming.
It is a short, well-written paper, illustrated with easily read charts and satellite images. I believe this book adds in no small measure to the body of research.
This book is nonsense. Both major analyses of the satellite record show that lower troposphere temperatures have gone up at a similar rate to the temperature at the surface since 1979. One of these analyses is UAH, by Spencer and Christy who are both AGW (anthropogenic global warming) skeptics.
Furthermore, the statement in the blurb that says: "In 2007 we got some serious cooling while climate models using carbon dioxide theory insisted on relentless warming at the same time" is also utter nonsense. The climate models forced with steadily-increasing greenhouse gases show the same sort of ups-and-downs in average global temperature from year-to-year that we actually see. In fact, in the models it is not uncommon to have periods of, say, a decade or so when the temperature trend is zero or even a bit negative.
Clearly, the author of this book has absolutely no clue what he is talking about.
Easy read that explains much of climate in terms of ocean currents and specifically the El Nino and La Nina events that warm and cool the planet periodically. While I don't entirely agree with the authors assertion that man-made CO2 had virtually no effect at all, I'd certainly agree that CO2 has a much smaller effect than what is claimed by the IPCC and that other forces - entirely natural ones - have a large influence on the climate. The ENSO cycle is just one of them, and this book gives a simple model that has good explanatory power. The relative warmth of the past decade is simply and clearly explained and so is the polar melting of 2007. Frankly its amazing that the IPCC and the alarmist crowd doesn't have much to say about natural causes of climate change, when we all know that a large ice age suddenly ended at the start of the current warm era that melted glaciers that were 2 miles thick. Nature did that all on its own without any SUVs or coal fired plants. Anyway I definitely recommend reading this book and if the authors work was rejected by Nature and Science I'd encourage him to submit papers to other journals-these ideas need to be discussed. One thought provoking aspect of this book is the idea put forward that explains the warming of the early years of the 21st century in terms of the super El Nino (and lack of the usual cooling La Nina in the next couple of years that followed), and then it also explains the lack of warming since that time by showing we are now back to a regular El Nino-La Nina cycle. The lack of warming since about 2001 is mystifying everyone else, but this idea makes everything crystal clear. If these ideas are true, then we won't see any major warming in the coming decades.
This book is uninformed, to use a diplomatic phrase and word. Judging from the book, the author simply has no humility. The issues he goes over in his small treatise have been examined in various ways by individual scientists and scientific organizations concerned about anthropocentric climate change with very different conclusions. This includes the IPCC, the US National Academies of Sciences (about 4 times), national academies of sciences from about 20 other nations, and a multitude of other scientific organizations. The author would have us believe that climate change is a hoax fostered by the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists, and that data has been manipulated. The author is not well published in the literature. Don't waste your money. Oh yes, the book is self published! I wonder why?
Was this review helpful to you?