![81B3RbTSszL._SL1500_[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/81b3rbtsszl-_sl1500_1.jpg?quality=83)
Here is a book with a twist – an eco gone rogue and self modified into a climate change “denier”. His experience parallels many, actually, including some of mine (though I’d never join Greenpeace, UPDATE: and now after having read his Kindle book, I’ll point out that I believe that CO2 has some effect, but far less than has been claimed, especially where feedbacks operate) – Anthony
From the description:
Paul Caruso once lived in an off-grid eco-community, grew much of his own food and was an active member of Greenpeace. However, over the past few years he has lost his faith in human induced climate change and become a denier!
He doesn’t really deny that the climate is changing – he has just come to the conclusion that it is natural variation.
It seems that increasing numbers of people are becoming sceptical about the human induced part of global warming and this book attempts to show climate scientists why and, perhaps more importantly, what they can do about it.
There are certain specific points that climate scientists are not currently answering and which they urgently need to answer if they want to convince people.
==============================================================
“…specific points that climate scientists are not currently answering.”
Gosh, ya think?
Here is a further description:
You can get the book on Amazon here
h/t to reader Paul M
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You just have to give them the clear facts about climate change like here http://climal.com/climate-change-facts.php
“Of course climate change is happening it’s been going on for billions of years so why would it stop now?”
It sounds like he might be channeling Richard Lindzen…
I wouldn’t doubt that many of the skeptics have a similar story to tell. I’ve mentioned my similar story here before, though I wasn’t in Greenpeace.
The bottom line is – as he found – that the science just isn’t there. He is right: Arming oneself with the data doesn’t do any good. The believers don’t want to know any facts; they learn everything they know from popular news media 2nd-hand reports, and that is enough for them.
When you argue with them, their last – and weakest – defense is this:
“Well, what if it’s true?”
What a weak-kneed reason to do ANYTHING… especially when it is possible to go out and find FACTS.
So when someone asks, “Well what if it’s true?” the comeback is probably,
“There are enough facts out there for you to find out if it is true or not. So, get off your lazy behind and go look into the facts. If you don’t lift a finger to find out the facts, then you don’t qualify to express an opinion. Now get out of my face and quit wasting my time.“
@Jquip at 7:43 am:
Jeez, dude, cut the guy some SLACK. There is a true open and independent mind, and you are badmouthing him. Not cool.
The guy has seen the error of his ways – which was to uncritically accept what they told him. And, when he went out to find out what was behind it, he discovered the Man Behind the Curtain.
Isn’t THAT why we are ALL here? Or did some of us just deny warming because our friends were doing it? Gullible on either side is DUMB.
The more informed people get, the more the warmists will lose numbers. Why? Not because it is “our side” but because the facts support us.
Look at Climategate. What was the lesson to the world? It wasn’t that our side is right. It was that their side was stacking the deck and colluding to defraud people and governments. And what was the reaction – from governments and journalists/news people? A MUCH reduced enthusiasm (read a higher skepticism) for global warming as an issue.
And THAT is all our side wanted to do, was to get people to finally start thinking for themselves.
So we should rejoice when someone goes to the effort of writing a book saying, “Hey guys, you lost me as a supporter, because you HAD NOTHING – now either put up or shut up!”
I would say: Asking how much of climate change in the past 50 years or so has been from human causes, and how much has been from natural variations?
It appears to me that both exist. So, the manmade factor’s significance is much more zero, and much less than claimed by those saying recent-decades climate change is to be blamed on humans.
@Robert W Turner at 8:33 am:
“I like how the title implies that the book is nothing but a cultist diatribe bashing CAGW skeptics. It’s a good thing there isn’t much going on upstairs in a cultist’s head or it would explode after the first page.”
I see this as a GOOD thing. With the title, most of the readers will be warmists. And when they start seeing his questioning, SOME of them will keep reading, and begin to doubt, too.
Those here who read this guy’s thing as him wanting to be re-convinced are missing the whole point, and the point is:
They have lost a died-in-the-wool supporter, someone who had EVERY reason to keep on believing in it, but he saw that the Emperor was not wearing any clothes.
And if they can lose HIM, Dudes! if they lost HIM, their cause is goin’ DOWN. And his book will hook a few more who will realize that they haven’t been critiquing the warmist stuff enough.
One more has swung to the middle.
Remember #1: A defense lawyer only has to create reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury.
Remember #2: THEY are the ones who have made extraordinary claims, not us! We don’t have to prove OUR side – we only have to point out, “HEY! Where is your proof?”
And this guy is saying he is asking the same question. And he is not going back.
Why not? Because he will never be that gullible again, not on this subject. He has crossed the Rubicon.
THIS IS A GOOD SIGN.
I downloaded it to my kindle. Good short book for the layman . A great book to send to any friends/family who are of the warmist type. I am surprised that it is not available as printed matter. On that point, go to your local bookstore, you will be hard pressed to find ANY books on the skeptical side, but tons on the warmist/alarmist side. I wonder why?
Jquip says:
October 30, 2013 at 7:43 am
“I genuinely would like to be persuaded again that CO2 is causing, or even could cause, us a problem” — Book Author
+++++++++
The Book Author is like Cypher who chooses to reinsert himself into the Matrix…
The Pompous Git says:
October 30, 2013 at 4:02 pm
DirkH said @ur momisugly October 30, 2013 at 3:22 pm
John F. Hultquist says:
October 30, 2013 at 12:18 pm
[snip]
Seems Paul is both quite old and a slow learner.”
It’s the Ganja that does that. Blocks transmission of contents from short term to long term memory.
And the NSAIDs some of us old folks take for arthritic pain cause heart attacks. Which would you prefer?
=======================================
Pain helps you know that you’re actually alive……. beer helps to thin the blood as well as remedy other infirmities. 😉
Steve Garcia says:
October 30, 2013 at 9:13 pm
“Of course climate change is happening it’s been going on for billions of years so why would it stop now?”
It sounds like he might be channeling Richard Lindzen…
I wouldn’t doubt that many of the skeptics have a similar story to tell. I’ve mentioned my similar story here before, though I wasn’t in Greenpeace.
The bottom line is – as he found – that the science just isn’t there. He is right: Arming oneself with the data doesn’t do any good. The believers don’t want to know any facts; they learn everything they know from popular news media 2nd-hand reports, and that is enough for them.
When you argue with them, their last – and weakest – defense is this:
“Well, what if it’s true?”
What a weak-kneed reason to do ANYTHING… especially when it is possible to go out and find FACTS.
So when someone asks, “Well what if it’s true?” the comeback is probably,
“There are enough facts out there for you to find out if it is true or not. So, get off your lazy behind and go look into the facts. If you don’t lift a finger to find out the facts, then you don’t qualify to express an opinion. Now get out of my face and quit wasting my time.“
++++++++++++
Great post Steve!!! You have the argument down to a science!
And please remind them that if they think reading the media is actual research, then they are in fact having other people tell them what to think and say… first step towards becoming a useful idiot. But say it nicer than I say it:)
I bought and read the booklet today. It is a nice layman’s book on why people become skeptics. Next time you get in an argument with a layman alarmist, just walk away and give them a copy of the book. It will be a better day for you and for your friend.
Always worth remembering this:
http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com/2008/04/12/green-advocates-failing-in-climate-debate/
Having popularized solar panels since ever, having manufactured solar food dryers, having promoted energy efficient cookers, having entered a BBQ contest with a solar cooker, having walked the decks of the Rainbow Warrior II, I still remain utterly unconvinced that CO2 poses an immediate or future or even far future risk to the human race, or anything else.
We have much larger problems. The prime one is the lack of unity at the international level that would allow the human race to deal with ill-defined national borders, economic exploitation of the local workforce to promote exports to the detriment of the country of destination, slavery and human trafficking, gross inequality of income and opportunity, the systematic oppression and denial of rights for women and ‘lower classes’, the promotion of toxic forms of nationalism… the list is quite long and cannot be solved without some form of a formal international forum with teeth. The UN was not formed as a governmental organization, though there are those who would like to use it as such. A world without a UN would soon go to war again or larger scales. We need a ‘real UN’ where I get a vote. No taxation without representation.
It is interesting to read here so many times that ‘the UN wants to rule the world’. There is no doubt that various political movements ‘want to rule the world’ but those opposing collaborative methods are no better than those who advocate them if ‘everything’ falls into their hands. UN opponents just want to rule it ‘differently’ with their ideas enforced. Does living in economic chaos, interminable conflict and perched on the edge of war appeal to people who do not accept CAGW? You gotta oppose non-scientific nonsense and therefore must also accept political naiveté? The alternative to CAGW is not loose cannons and lousy canons.
James: Re: http://climal.com/climate-change-facts.php
Your link contains no empirical evidence that CO2 is the dial to the worlds temperature. The reason there is no empirical evidence is because there is none and that is after spending 70 billion dollars. Epic fail eh? A quick look at your link says “As the Pew Center on Global Climate Change explains, “The Earth’s average surface temperature has increased by 1.4°F (0.8°C) since the early years of the 20th century. The 11 warmest years on record (since 1850) have all occurred in the past 13 years. The five warmest years to date are 2005, 1998, 2002, 2003, 2007.” Really? Tell me how is it possible to measure the average temperature of the earth in 1850. And even if were really proven that those dates were the hottest. it does not mean that the increase in temperature was caused by man released CO2. I note that there is no mention that prior to 1850 the earth was coming out of the LIA. They also fail to mention that the empirical evidence that they think they have is really just a model on a computer screen. Also show me the evidence that even if the world warmed further 0.8 Deg c that is would not be an improvement?
3.59€ e-book
The Pompous Git says:
October 30, 2013 at 4:02 pm
“”DirkH said @ur momisugly October 30, 2013 at 3:22 pm
It’s the Ganja that does that. Blocks transmission of contents from short term to long term memory.”
And the NSAIDs some of us old folks take for arthritic pain cause heart attacks. Which would you prefer?”
Git, what I actually did try when I had an arthritic inflammation in my knees as a teenager was autogenic training, and (non-spiritual) Yoga exercises. It worked for me at the time until the inflammation went away. Do what works for you but be aware of the side effects.
The planet moves from an Inter-Glacial Holocene to an Ice Age and back. We live in a Holocene and the peak temperature in a Holocene is referred to as the Holocene Climatic Optimum……our was 10,000 years ago. Therefore we have been cooling for 10,000 years but there are peaks and troughs in line with solar maximums and minimums and it is this that the AGW crowd fail to understand. On top of that sea levels drop in an Ice Age and rise in a Holocene. There has been no evidence of any warming of the Troposphere, a key factor missing from the AGW argument and Negative Feedback is ignored or denied so that the climate play stations always predict warming. But the bottom line is that it is impossible for Carbon Dioxide to overheat the planet due to it’s heat creation being logarithmic….thus us you stack it up the effect tails off around 300ppm…and we are at around 390ppm. Any more warming from this very beneficial trace gas will be in the order of 1C for a doubling of current levels and even less for any further doubling.
I read the book. It would be understatement to say I agreed with it. In almost every way it could have been written by me. Even his attitude towards the dialogue (“please, prove me wrong”) was identical to mine.
Weird.
Motivations are like smoke. My Mother taught me early that when listening to others expound their epiphanies, to always say “fascinating” instead of “bullsh*t”. It is a fail-safe default. GK
@G. Karst – your mother must have been a fine southern lady. I am sure she also said “Well, bless your heart…..” often as well. 😉
This book is, in my evaluation, a very good document. I don’t have a hardware Kindle but have had the free software version for a number of years. About 90 seconds and you can be reading. It’s short enough that reading it on screen (1-2 hours) is not tiring. And I certainly don’t object to paying a small fee for this. It reads very easily and enjoyably.
I really didn’t learn anything really new, and there was virtually nothing to quibble with from my understanding. Indeed, at most points likely, WUWT readers will be imagining themselves saying the same things – perhaps not as well as Caruso does. It’s kind of like after having hiked over a large region and seen most of it, someone hands you a complete map. A complete, well reasoned, battle guide in fact.
I assume the somewhat enigmatic “curve-ball” title and supposed posturing were the author’s intent. I don’t object that he says he would not mind being convinced he is now wrong, as even while he says this, he sets the bar against converting BACK to an alarmist position very very high. Facts and reasoning.
Real scientists never say “you’re wrong”. They propose a better theory. The vast majority of my fellow commentatators fall into the first group.
DirkH said @ur momisugly October 31, 2013 at 4:59 am
To the best of my knowledge, osteaoarthritis does not go away. There is no cure. A close friend was advised by his GP to take a drug called Vioxx. My friend subsequently had five heart attacks in fairly rapid succession. Maybe ganja does cause short term memory loss, but that sounds a lot less drastic than losing a huge slice of the quality of life.
Well, I finally got around to downloading and reading the book last night. There’s some really good logical and defendable points made, unfortunately they’re interspersed with misunderstanding of the science, arguments that could get the SkS seal of approval for skeptical arguments (i.e.: strawmans), and contradictions.
This book could really have used a scientifically literate editor!
I just don’t see recommending this book as is, although I absolutely love the premise, the general order, most of the material covered, and a lot of the arguments. There are just too many departures from technical accuracy.