Donna Laframboise's new book causing reviews in absentia amongst some AGW advocates

Dr. Peter Gleick

I had to laugh after reading the reviews on for Donna Laframboise’s book: The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate ExpertThere’s some double fun here, because the title reminds me of the language used in the 1 star review given by Dr. Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute.

The first fun part: Gleick apparently never read the book before posting a negative review, because if he had, he wouldn’t be intellectually slaughtered by some commenters who challenge his claims by pointing out page and paragraph in the book showing exactly how Gleick is the one posting false claims. You can read the reviews here at Amazon, and if you’ve bought the book and have read it, add your own. If you haven’t bought it yet, here’s the link for the Kindle edition. Best $4.99 you’ll ever spend. If you don’t own a Kindle you can read this book on your iPad or Mac via Amazon’s free Kindle Cloud Reader – or on your desktop or laptop via Kindle for PC  software.

The other fun part? Gleick apparently doesn’t realize he’s up against a seasoned journalist, he thinks Donna is just another “denier”. Another inconvenient truth for Gleick is that she was a member of the board of directors of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association – serving as a Vice-President from 1998-2001.


Lies, misrepresentations, and a bible for climate change deniers,

October 16, 2011 By Peter Gleick “PGleick”
This review is from: The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert (Kindle Edition)

This book is a stunning compilation of lies, misrepresentations, and falsehoods about the fundamental science of climate change.

It compiles the old arguments, long refuted, about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which summarizes the state of science on climate change. The IPCC reports — the most comprehensive summary of climate science in the world — are so influential and important, that they must be challenged by climate change deniers, who have no other science to stand on. LaFramboise recycles these critiques in a form bound to find favor with those who hate science, fear science, or are afraid that if climate change is real and caused by humans then governments will have to act (and they hate government).

Are you already convinced that climate change is false? Then you don’t need this book, since there is nothing new in it for you.

If you respect science, then you ALSO don’t need this book, since there’s no science in it, and lots of pseudo-science and misrepresentations of science. See, especially, the section trying to discredit the “hockey stick” — long a bugaboo of the anti-climate change crowd. Seven independent scientific commissions and studies have separately verified it, but you won’t find out about that in this book.

Really: save your money and battery life.



Audrey says:

Peter Gleick offers no evidence for his unsubstantiated claims. This book is not really about science. It is entirely about the IPCC process: for example, several of the lead authors of the IPCC reports lacked experience, qualifications and appear to be chosen for their connections to WWF, EDF, Greenpeace and other environmental NGO’s – all of which is exposed in this book including names, dates and full references. Furthermore, the book confirms that over 5,000 references (including some of the strongest high impact claims of the IPCC showing evidence of the dangerousness of man-made Global Warming) are to “grey literature” – i.e. to reports that were NEVER verified by peer review – all this despite assurances from the head of the IPCC that the IPCC ONLY use peer-reviewed science in their “climate bible” report. Worse the book also provides conclusive evidence that some influential people within the IPCC were well aware of deficiencies and yet took no action to correct inadequacies in these processes (the book includes explicit examples where IPCC authors elevated their concerns about the poor quality and misrepresentation of the scientific consensus by the IPCC process …but these concerns were simply swept aside!)

If you respect science (as Peter Gleick states and presumably aspires to) then be absolutely sure that you read the entire book because it is a real eye opener! What you may have believed was an IPCC authoritative synopsis of “settled climate science”, according to the august IPCC, will start to smell like the most rotten, disgusting and corrupt fraud of the last century! In short,this book by Donna Laframboise, is an investigative journalistic shocker that is to our modern era as Watergate was to the Nixon era!


Roger Knights says:

P Gleick writes: “See, especially, the section trying to discredit the “hockey stick” — long a bugaboo of the anti-climate change crowd. Seven independent scientific commissions and studies have separately verified it, but you won’t find out about that in this book.”

Oh yes you WILL find out about it in the book, at Kindle location 2099 in Ch. 32. Here’s what it says:

“Depending on whether you’re talking to a climate skeptic or a climate activist (people in the second camp control the Wikipedia page on this and many other topics related to global warming), the hockey stick graph has either been totally discredited or remains a sound piece of science whose findings have been confirmed by several independent studies. (footnote 32-2). As Montford’s book explains, such claims of independent corroboration are suspect, since these studies were conducted by many of the same small clique of researchers, use similarly flawed statistical techniques, and/or rely on the same dubious sources of data.”


PGleick: “This book is a stunning compilation of lies, misrepresentations, and falsehoods about the fundamental science of climate change.”

I notice that PG isn’t listed as having purchased the book. This gives him an “out” for his misleading statement above. The book isn’t primarily about “the science.” It’s about the IPCC’s claim, trumpeted by its Chairman, to be an impartial collection of the best experts on the topic, to rely on peer-reviewed science only, to have rules in place to ensure that proper procedures are followed, to intensively peer-review its draft documents, to be above the fray as far as policy prescriptions are concerned, etc., etc. This focus on the misbehavior of the IPCC (not its scientific claims) is apparent in the next paragraph from the book (after the one just quoted above):

“For the purposes of this discussion THE IMPORTANT POINT IS THAT THE IPCC PERFORMED NO DUE DILIGENCE before according the hockey stick graph such prominence.

……………… [27 paragraphs on the topic follow, and then this summing-up:]

“The essential point here is that the IPCC aggressively promoted a graph that had been produced by a young scientist who’d just been awarded his PhD. Even though the graph overturned decades of scholarship, even though it negated a widespread consensus about what the temperature record of the past 1000 years looked like, the IPCC didn’t bother to verify its [statistical] accuracy. What has been described as ‘one of the most rigorous scientific review bodies in existence’ felt no need to ensure that its case wasn’t being built on quicksand.”


PGleick writes: “It compiles the old arguments, long refuted, about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ….”


“Are you already convinced that climate change is false? Then you don’t need this book, since there is nothing new in it for you.”

Wrong again. The book stresses (in Chs. 33 & 34, primarily) the report of the InterAcademy Council (IAC), presented in August 2010, which is recent. And this book contains important NEW material from its inquiry into the IPCC. Here, starting at Location 2557 in the Acknowledgments, are the relevant passages:

“Hilary [Ostrov] single-handedly shook loose 678 pages [footnote link] of material on which this book relies. During its 2010 investigation of the IPCC, the IAC committee posted an online questionnaire. We were told the responses would be made public, but months after the report was released that still hadn’t occurred. Hilary tirelessly pursued the matter until some (but not all) of these responses were divulged.

“From a journalists perspective, they are solid gold–being the equivalent of interviews with dozens of people about their IPCC experience. Until I read that material the IPCC was still a remote and confusing organization.”


Buy, but more importantly, READ the book, so you too can be prepared to refute non-readers like Dr. Gleick. Oh and be sure to read the story just above this one (publishing soon) about the next train wreck the IPCC has gotten itself into.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Rick Bradford

This really is bad — Gleick obviously never read the book before attacking it, or he would have realised that it is mainly about the IPCC’s procedures and not the core science.
His review is simply more desperate Leftie agit-prop.

Mike Bromley the Kurd

Now now, Peter, that’s just plain lazy. I suppose you think that scientific skepticism is like opium, or worse, heroin: addictive, unhealthy and prone to leaving its users in a state of zombie-like torpor. I guess you have only one point of reference, your own…with which to compare, having slept through the revolution.

[snip – over the top – Anthony]. How could anyone take him for anything but an ignorant crank? It’s obvious that he has never read Donna’s book, yet he gives his opinion on it.

Michael in Sydney

Just bought it – thanks


Seeing someone ignorant get verbally destroyed provides such a paradoxically visceral satisfaction.

After seeing Gleick’s review, I am so reading this book.


The IPCC paradigm is just sooo fundamentally corrupt … and thanks to Donna this truth is clearly made for everybody to see.
Thankyou, Donna!

Stevo lane

What is a kindle? (i refuse to allow the term to be absorbed into my book loving mind)

Man Bearpigg

NO NO NO, you have it all wrong guys. This is how Pro AGW climate ‘scienctists’ work. They do not need to read anything to know that it is wrong! Didn’t you know that ?

Gareth Phillips

I have bought it, will read it and make a decision on its merits based on it’s robustness in its analysis of the situation and whether it can stay focused on the subject without drifting into left or right wing politics.

I second Smokey’s assessment of Peter “Bright but not very bright” Gleick. He’s been behind some of the most egregious AGW cock-ups, including Ursus Bogus and a suspiciously timed public letter just as his latest book went on sale.

Mike Bromley the Kurd

Gareth, Gareth, Gareth. /sarc….”it’s merits” It is? Possession is 9/10th….but not in this case!
[Fixed, thanx. ~Sisyphus, mod.]


If Dr. Peter Gleick says, “Nothing to see here; please move along,” then there is likely something to see and one should stop and take note.


“Kevin becomes a teenager”

Peter Plail

I would point out to British purchasers that the price for them is $7.59 on the link above (VAT can only account for part of the difference). It is £4.99 from Amazon UK and 4.99 Euro in Europe. It would be nice to think that Donna would receive more when I buy it from the UK but I suspect that it goes into Amazon’s pocket.
Excellent value at any of the above prices, but it does highlight cynical treatment of UK readers.
As a footnote (sorry it is off-topic) most US items prices at X dollars are made available at £X in UK, with no attempt to allow for exchange rates. The excuse made is often the cost of support in the UK – I fail to see how this argument holds for delivery of a download.


Gleick is making a gigantic strategic mistake coming from a pro-AGW echo chamber. Too many activists have been telling each other how stupid the “deniers” are for too long, and they actually believe it. Now, they are underestimating the enemy. It had to happen.

UK Sceptic

Donna’s got the buggers on the run. Lookit ’em scuttle for cover!

For those not into Kindl-ing, don’t forget that for the same US$4.99 you can get the .pdf version at
And there will be a paper-back version available within the next week.
But Gleick certainly scored an own goal with his ill-informed screed, didn’t he?!
Hilary Ostrov


I’m reminded of this unforgettable dialog from the movie Little Big Man:
General Custer : There are no Indians there, I suppose.
Jack Crabb : I didn’t say that. There are thousands of Indians down there. And when they get done with you, there won’t be nothing left but a greasy stain. This ain’t the Washite River, General, and them ain’t helpless women and children waiting for you. They’re Cheyenne braves, and Sioux. You go down there, General, if you’ve got the nerve.

Roy UK

Just a bit of information. There is no need to buy a Kindle/Nook or whatever just to read the e-book. There is a free e-book reader available for PC/Mac called Calibre. It also handles PDF files.
I hope this helps.

Aynsley Kellow

Gleick is an Ehrlich acolyte, a macrophage who is despatched to the site of any infectious ideas. He cropped up in the assault on Lomborg.

Peter Gleick not liking the book, we know he hasn’t read it, is probably the best reason for buying and reading Donna’s book.

Roger Knights

“… the next train wreck the IPCC has gotten itself into.”

It was inevitable, with Choo-Choo Patchuri in the cab.

Ian W

You should publish one of the other comments in your main post:
Posted on Oct 16, 2011 11:56:52 PM PDT
Foxgoose says:
Lots of hysterical, defensive rhetoric with no reference to the book’s content – has he even read it?
I believe Gleick claims to be a “climate scientist”. People will draw their own conclusions from his fact-free rant.
Sound like one of the activists from under the stone that Donna Laframboise has just turned over.


Gleick has made a total fool of himself in posting that review. I think Dagfinn has nailed the explanation for PG’s foolishness. I wonder how long it will be before he “disappears” his review. Hopefully he’s as slow a learner as Dana1981, so we can all stand around poking him with sticks for a while yet, but I suspect not. Probably should screen dump it now, to preserve such a merry memory.

John Whitman

Here is my 5 star review of Donna L.’s new book.

Donna L. encourages fellow journalists to part the IPCC veils
The Kindle edition of this book that I enjoyed reading over the weekend accomplishes two goals.
First, it informs interested non-expert citizens about the non-scientific fundamentals of the IPCC with its bias of using activist personnel who promote non-scientific agendas driven by the desire to create alarmism. The Kindle edition does so with a great wealth of online linked references.
Second, it is a manifesto calling for fellow journalists to be what the professional journalist should be . . . . objective and skeptical toward the IPCC. With the significant attention her book is already getting and its promise of going viral, critical journalists that are willing to part the veils of the IPCC will be well leveraged for their own expose of the IPCC.
Donna L. was clever to set the stage in a human context by showing that the IPCC indeed can be viewed as a malicious pre-adult who has failed to accept reality and is a bully.

I would like to hear from Dona L. about whether the sales are meeting her expectations.

Roger Knights

What do threads on other sites have to say about this book? Maybe someone who regularly visits many sites could provide a handful of links.


I must admit I wasn’t going to bother reading the book, since I read Donna’s blog, but thanks to the good doctor, I think I’ll try to help the book onto the Best Sellers list
Thanks for the recommendation, Dr. Gleick

Ken Harvey

Thank you Roy UK for the ebook reader link. May your tribe increase.

For people complaining about the UK price from Amazon – the solution is simple – I live in the eurozone, and bought the PDF version of the book – I paid using Paypal and the Total deducted from my Paypal account was $4.99, which came to approx 3.79 Euros – I could then immediately download the PDF from the website in question – I presume that Sterling would convert to something like £3.40, making it cheaper than the £4.88 Amazon will try to charge you.
Ms Laframboise’s webstie ( lists the various option for purchase – about the PDF version she says – “Digital option #2 is a PDF – also priced at $4.99. Formatted to save paper, it’s 123 standard, printer-sized pages (the last 20 of which are footnotes). Delivered instantly, it avoids shipping costs and is a comfortable, pleasant read.”
So don’t reward Amazon for trying to rip you off – just go buy the PDF version from the other website. Buying the PDF version has clear advantages over the Kindle version – Not only will it be cheaper for UK readers to purchase, you can also read it on any computer anywhere, running any operating system
Direct link for PDF version –

Ron Albertson

Ox ‘Gored’ much, Mr. Gleick?

PS: the PDF version also has all the clickable Web-links and clickable footnote references to be found in the Kindle version

PPS: online currency converter says that $4.99 currently converts to £3.17 – so even cheaper to buy the PDF


Smokey says: October 17, 2011 at 12:05 am
Peter Gleick is such an execrable POS. …… It’s obvious that he has never read Donna’s book, yet he gives his opinion on it.

Donna Laframboise’s publication, The Delinquent Teenager: Who was Exposed as the World’s Top Climate Expert was released to the public this week @ AUS $ 4.99 . It is a descriptive case study of the work and output of the global Intergovernmental Government on Climate Change (IPCC) and the work underpinning this trillion $ global alliance and trade. Laframboise’s book is the literature review, from the 1960s to 2010, the review that should have been conducted by the sciences and academia.
A freelance journalist, Laframboise delivers a superb read. Packed with two years of rigorous research on the subject, her book is well referenced for the interested and the sceptical reader, this is evidenced by her previous career in investigative journalism. Her volunteer co-workers reviewed and commented both on primary research and the final work.
Laframboise presents, chapter by chapter, a coterie of international individuals and their unscrupulous activities in science and the media whilst employed in government subsidised academia and public health, some aligned to agencies of the far left green, and some not, mainstream media journalists and of benefits received by employees of the United Nations, and much more.
The book presents a chronology of the publicly published climate-related data collections, their support from an eminent gaggle, and the calculated chimera of statistical and methodological malpractices. These people; scientists, policy makers and activists) are exposed. Each chapter documents their rorts, their tautology in greed, self-interest and their poor experiments. All collated through pal-review and disseminated through the global governing IPCC and its glossy manuscripts. National and international agencies using computer graphics sold temporal justifications, coloured graphs of hockey schticks and media bites to the public. Laframboise’ juxtaposes this corruption in science and communication providing some explanation of the true scientists, the science and lived experiences of those prepared to speak out against the rorts and loosing their careers and livelihoods.
Science and applied science as the public would wish applied, for benefit and for the greater public good in policy, domestic and aid expenditure is exposed through Laframboise’s diligent research and humour.
This global scam with its claw-like grip over science and its communication may well have neglected the suffering and real needs of many millions of children, and their parents.
Donna Laframboise’s book is a soundly researched exposé of what well may be modernity’s greatest global scam and horror.

Chuck Nolan

If I order from the above link does Anthony get any credit?
He deserves something for bringing this to us.
Donna’s book is not listed on the sidebar….will it be later?

It appears Dr. Peter Gleick is a student of the Nancy Pelosi school of book reviewing:
you know, “we’ve got to review the book so we can read it and see what’s in it”.


If too many people find Gleick’s review unhelpful it will disappear. His review is so bad, it is best to let it stand as a test of the critical thinking skills of the readers. Best to simply reply with biting wit and facts to support your points.
I have the pdf. It is an amazing litany of problems with the IPCC. It includes some devastating vignettes about key players in this ongoing tragedy for science and is an almost endless source of material for Josh’s pictorial barbs. Most readers here will be familiar with most of the points raised, but having them all in the same place is going to be helpful when AR5 comes out.
On the other hand, one, two and three sentence paragraphs are tedious and the whole thing could have done with a critical edit. It reads too much like the comments from a blog.
One prediction is that the CAGW PR machine will swing in to high gear in order to neutralize Donna’s indictment!

Chris D.

Rick Bradford says:
October 16, 2011 at 11:44 pm
“His review is simply more desperate Leftie agit-prop.”
Here’s the really cool part: Donna L. is a self-described social progressive. Think about that. This is someone who is saying “time out” and standing up for principle.
I keep waiting for the likes of Bill McKibben to step up and go picket the wind farms that are slaughtering birds – some of which are endangered species – but they lack the same intellectual honesty. So instead, they advocate saving the global biosphere by literally thrashing the local biosphere. When one is so selective about upholding one’s principles for political or ideological reasons, one loses the fight.

More Soylent Green!

I wonder what else Dr. Gleick didn’t read before expressing his opinion of it?


I have just downloaded Kindle for PC but have been unable to register it to my Amazon account.
After a bit of searching it seems that Kindle for PC only accepts alpha-numeric characters in its password field.
If this is true it would require me to change my Amazon password to a less secure version which is completely unacceptable.
Has anyone else had this problem?


It appears to me that Dr. Gleick may have libeled Donna F. with that “review” but IANAL.

Roger Knights

It includes some devastating vignettes about key players in this ongoing tragedy for science and is an almost endless source of material for Josh’s pictorial barbs.

This book is a major arrow in the elephant–and it has barbs.
I just hope there’s a sequel. There’s enough material for one. And maybe the first one will shake loose more material.


The first fun part: Gleick apparently never read the book before posting a negative review,
It had a proper peer review………..


Gleick’s review appears to be every bit as accurate as everything else he produces.
(Disclosure: I haven’t read his review yet.)

In most professions, Dr. Peter Gleick would be embarrassed and shamed by his peers.
Any chance of that ??


Isn’t writing a “review” of a book one has not read cheating and lying? Isn’t this a classic practice among dishonest high school students, and remarkably consistent with Donna Laframboise’s book title?
Obviously, the alarmists, who call themselves “real climate scientists,” have no trouble with lying and cheating day in and day out about anything and everything. Do they EVER tell the truth? This man, MALICIOUSLY SETTING OUT TO HARM MS. LAFRAMBOISE WITH A FAKE REVIEW, is beyond contempt. How small and loathsome can a man become?


The other fun part? That some warmist numpty has clearly trawled every review and comment and voted them up or down accordingly. Almost every positive review has something like “25/26 people found this review helpful”, or 38/39, or 24/25. Almost every comment to the negative reviews that points out their spitefulness and brazen ignorance of the actual content of the book has something like “44 of 45 people think this post adds to the discussion”, or 50/51, or 58/59. Likewise, the comments backing up the negative reviews have just 1 vote in support (at least until Joe Romm rallies his troops, whose numbers we’ll be able to count in a very precise way).
Kind of endearingly pathetic, isn’t it? Confirms something we’ve long known about the CAGW ‘scientists’, activists and proponents: there’s some really diligent minds there, but it’s a shame that diligence is being applied to the detriment of understanding and integrity rather than the benefit.

Fred from Canuckistan

“This book is a stunning compilation of lies, misrepresentations, and falsehoods about the fundamental science of climate change”
Peter has just written the perfect description of the IPCC Reports.
100% accurate.


hro001 said:
October 17, 2011 at 1:37 am
For those not into Kindl-ing, don’t forget that for the same US$4.99 you can get the .pdf version at
Thank You Sir!

Roger Knights

PS: I should have added: the arrow has hit a vital spot.
I like to imagine the conformist play-it-safers in the English Establishment reading this and starting to worry that maybe they’ve bet the farm on the wrong horse.