That's the message from a lot of reviewers. Why? Well, I'll hit on many of those issues people had with the book (or global warming) since the comments need to be addressed. But first, a word from President Bush.
President Bush: "I believe that greenhouse gases are creating a problem, a long-term problem that we got to deal with. ... There's an interesting confluence now between dependency upon fossil fuels from a national economic security perspective, as well as the consequences of burning fossil fuels for greenhouse gases." He said this in an interview on June 30, 2005. (Find the interview that contains this quotation by searching google with "bush global warming quotation" and look for the timesonline site). The fact that President Bush acknowledges global warming as a problem caused by humans is important and should have been included in this book and the film. I think this would have reached out to those who do not trust the media or Al Gore. Also, note most other major leaders, such as Tony Blair, have personally acknowledged global warming and are actively working to reduce human impact on the climate.
Gore isn't a scientist, so why should we trust him?
Frankly, scientists rarely address the public directly and they use PR people to do that. Gore is doing a portion of that PR work with the book and film. To understand the issue, acknowledge the serious problem we are facing, and portray that to the public you do not have to be a scientist but a person who is good at getting information out.
Why no citations?
Basically because the book (and movie) are directed at non-science people and as a first source of information for most people. If you want to find the info that Gore talks about, it isn't hard -- just do some searching on the internet and you will find (dependable) websites with the information. For example, the ice core data can be found by searching "Vostok Ice Core Data."
Global warming is from natural cycles, not CO2.
No one seems to even be saying this anymore -- this is an old argument that those who haven't been keeping up to date still repeat. Yes, there is a possibility that natural cycles could contribute to global warming, but the current trend is much beyond what could have occurred from natural cycles alone and CO2 emissions account for the remaining portion.
Volcanic Eruptions & Wildfires are the real problem, not people
Wildfires, yes. Volcanic eruptions, no.
Volcanic eruptions can (and most do) actually have a strong initial cooling effect -- they don't just put out CO2 but put out lots of aerosols. Further, humans still put out more CO2 than these rare eruptions (since 1800, CO2 levels have increased 30% beyond any other time in the past 600,000 years).
Wildfires do produce a lot of CO2, but humans still produce about 1-2 times more. If fires were the cause of CO2 rise, why is it that they have conveniently happened during the last 200 years when that never occurred over the last 600,000 years?
Global warming is bunk, the world is cooling!
A serious look at any source that says this reveals the source is only looking at a small region of the globe instead of looking at measurements from around the globe. Often the sources say this early in their writings but fail to bring it up later when they make their conclusions.
The warming is just like the Medieval warming period.
That is inaccurate. The data that supports the existance of the MWP is only from the European region, which supports that Europe was warmer, but doesn't conclude the world was. When data that considers temperatures from around the globe was analyzed, it was found that the average global temperature actually remained pretty much constant (the MWP is nothing like we are seeing now).
Gore is a hypocrite -- he's just flying around wasting jet fuel!
Yes, his personal emissions are high, but consider what he has done. He has really pushed the issue into the public eye and made the issue become a more common discussion topic. Also, directly due to the movie, my family is now working to reduce CO2 emissions and we are buying green power. The good he is doing overall, reducing emissions by tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of people, greatly outweigh his own emissions due to his travel.
Why does the movie/book cost anything? Wouldn't it reach more people if he made it free?
Good questions, but there are a lot of costs involved with both, and whatever profit that would otherwise be given to Gore is actually going towards educating people on this issue (Gore is taking no profits from the book or movie -- NONE). Costs include the production of the movie & book, along with paying people for the rights to use all the images in the book along with the many snippets of video in the movie, paying for the (quite expensive) film for movie theaters, etc. All this adds up to a lot of cost that needs to be paid down somewhere. Again, what profit that would be made by Gore is going towards the cause; he gets no money from the book or movie.
Why no "e-book?"
I'm actually not sure, but I have 3 good guesses. My first guess is to protect the copyrights of the hundreds of pictures in the book; it is much easier to make a copy of a digital image than it is to scan an image from a book. Secondly, ebooks aren't always very popular, and with all the pictures in this book, it really is nice to have a hard copy. Lastly, it is much easier to share a regular book with a friend than an e-book, so the book may get more "reads" if it is a paper copy.
There is of course the obvious possibility that they just didn't think about doing an e-book since they aren't terribly common.
There is so much personal information in this book! I don't like it!
Yes there is, and since this is a book, you can skip it! But if you want to get into WHY Al Gore is doing this, what motivated him to do this, or why people really should care about global warming, read it. A lot of the personal stories really boil down to one fact -- we are responsible for global warming and our kids who are going to pay for it.
Combatting global warming will hurt our economy.
Actually, if you do everything as an individual that is reasonable to combat global warming, you will break even or be very close to breaking even. For example, buying a compact fluorescent light bulb instead of a traditional incandescent actually saves the user $30-60 over the lifetime of the bulb in energy costs (it is just that upfront cost that people don't like), and on top of that it prevents about 1000 pounds of CO2! Note that if you do buy these bulbs, buy bulbs with a higher equivalency than what is needed since companies often inflate the equivalency. Buying high efficiency appliances also often saves money in the long run. The only real money-eater in going green is paying the premium for renewable energy; thankfully the energy that these sources produce continues to drop by a few percent annually, making it very competitive in the long run -- it just needs a little help and a bit more time to really get going*.
*Note that there really is no free market right now -- the fossil fuel industry is subsidized, making it an unfair (national) market against renewable energy. Further, the fossil fuel industry has received tens of billions of dollars in subsidies over the years to build their infrastructure, especially when they were getting off the ground. Perhaps it would be fair to help the renewable energy industry get going as well since they offer us more national security on top of clean energy.
The book isn't as scientific or as rigorous as it should be.
This book is directed at non-scientists, so perhaps this is an unfair demand. For more rigorous info with lots of scientific citations, look online for (accredited) estabishments with websites that explain the issue. Right now the best source for this type of information is the internet. If anyone is curious where the data for the ice cores is, search "Vostok Ice Core Data"; Gore's information there is accurate (I graphed the data myself to confirm his graphs since the data is available online). Also check out "Beating the Heat," which is a book with LOTS of citations.
The book design is really annoying and Gore is condescending.
If you think Gore is condescending, just keep in mind that is not his intention. He is just doing his best to get this information out there. If you already know a lot about something in the book, skip ahead a little so you don't feel like he is trying to tell you something you know! It's a book so you can do that!
The book design is a little over the top, but I'm guessing it was done the way it was to make readers feel like they were flying through the information (always encouraging). I also thought it was a little too much but it was something I obviously was able to look past to see the major issues.
-----
Remark:
I've read every 1, 2, & 3 star review in the first 125 reviews here on Amazon. Of the 34 reviews, 26 gave absolutely no impression that they had actually read the book. 4 said they read the book but gave no information in their review that suggests they actually did*. I am convinced 4 actually did read the book; of those 4, their issues were all addressed above.
*One recent review (6/21/06, Michele Mccrum):
"I was not able to finish this book, so maybe I shouldn't review
but just the few chapters I read, and the rest I scanned, I knew for a FACT to be highly exagerated or just wrong outright."
If the reviewer had actually looked at the book, she would have known the book has no chapters and is just a continuous text. Here is an example of a reader who claimed to have read the book but clearly didn't even look at the inside of it. (This paragraph is part of the updating I have done to this review -- I'll continue to address new reviewers and add to the section above.)
As some previous reviewers have noted, the book and movie are similar. Honestly, I would recommend the movie (5 stars) over the book (4 stars) because it struck me much more to see video of events. The only thing that is really lacking in the movie is a description of what to do to reduce your own carbon emissions, all of which can be found on the book and movie's website, climatecrisis . n e t
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Flip to back Flip to front
Follow the Author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook
"Please retry" |
–
| — | — |
|
Hardcover, Import
"Please retry" | — | $5.27 |
|
Preloaded Digital Audio Player, Abridged
"Please retry" | $39.98 | $19.99 |
Frequently bought together
- +
- +
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Choose items to buy together.
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Top reviews from other countries
Cal
‘Very good’ puchased but ‘poor’
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on December 20, 2020Brian Ardron
It made good reading except for the printing very close to the ...
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on December 1, 2015
