Climate at a Glance is Available for Purchase Today on Amazon. It has already jumped to the top of many book categories for “new releases.” It is now the #1 new release in Climatology.
So I’ve been working on this for about a year. It’s ready. I give it about 72 hours before the forces of darkness try to take it down from Amazon. (Update : it has started, see review posted below.)
My new book: Climate at a Glance for Teachers and Students: Facts on 30 Prominent Climate Topics – is available on Amazon.com for the first time and debuted on Earth Day
Although I’m the primary author, the book is published by The Heartland Institute, the 2022 edition of the book breaks down 30 of the most frequently argued climate issues into short, “at-a-glance” summaries that provide, accurate, critical information concerning climate change. Topics include the latest data and analysis of the climate’s effect on crop production, drought, floods, coral reefs, sea-level rise, ice melt, extreme weather, the urban heat-island effect, wildfires, polar bears, the effect of COVID-19 on carbon dioxide levels, and more.
“Each topic has key takeaways, and is cited and referenced, often using U.S. government data from NOAA, NASA, EPA and other agencies to cut through the clutter and show the reality of each climate topic,” said Heartland Institute Senior fellow Anthony Watts,
“After spending decades on-camera during the evening TV news presenting meteorological events and trying to explain them in a way that a layperson can understand, I applied that experience to the production of this book.
“Simple, easy-to-digest explanations, factual references, and compelling graphics allow for easy reading of what are often complex climate topics,” Watts said.
BONUS: The paperback of the book contains links and a scannable QR-code to freely downloadable and distributable digital PDF copies of the book, as well as a PowerPoint slide deck for all the topics.
Co-author and Heartland Institute President James Taylor, who has studied, debated, and written about environmental and energy issues for nearly 20 years, says this book is an essential resource for teachers, students, and parents to counter the one-sided and alarmist climate instruction in most public schools today.
“The environmental left has done everything in its power to monopolize climate messaging and prevent students from learning the truth about asserted climate change,” Taylor said. “Climate at a Glance for Teachers and Students shows that scientific truth will always win out over agenda-driven propaganda.”
H. Sterling Burnett, director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environment Policy at The Heartland Institute, edited Watts’ and Taylor’s work. The book presents facts without the “hyperbolic statements of doom” common in academia and popular culture.
“If teachers are going to discuss climate change in their classrooms, the discussions should be grounded in an accurate representation of the science,” Burnett said. “Climate at a Glance provides this in a form easily accessible for teachers and students alike. Without frills or hyperbolic statements of doom, using verifiable data for topic after topic, Climate at a Glance demonstrates there is no climate crisis.”
UPDATE: Barton Paul Levinson, who hangs out at RealClimate has posted an Amazon review that is in my opinion, libelous. I doubt he even read it. There’s no “fossil fuel” money behind this. And I challenge him to factually discredit any entry. He can’t, so he resorts to this.
Readers of the book can post their own review, but please read it first.
Can you release it on kindle please
People can log in to their Amazon accounts and report that review as abuse. Enough people do that, and even Amazon will remove it.
where is the link to the hardcopy…i would like the powerpoints
Link for UK.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Climate-Glance-Teachers-Students-Prominent/dp/1934791938
Some reviews would be helpful.
I ordered it using the UK link.
At least you get to be interviewed on TV in USA. This would never happen in the UK, the land in the grip of climate alarmists. Not just the BBC, all the media. It is cult-like. Papers like the Guardian have really got it in for the Global Warming Policy Forum, that subversive group which is trying to bring the country down around our ears….
“Myths put out by the fossil fuel industry..”. Have any proof that they’re myths?
… or put out by the fossil fuel indistry?
Not yet listed on Amazon Australia. Mail is USD10. I will wait a few days to see if it gets listed in Oz before paying mail cost.
Well done, Anthony. May it sell well.
Geoff S
Bought the book and reported bad review
Ditto
‘Barton Paul Levenson (born May 9, 1960) is an American writer of science fiction, fantasy and the macabre’ (Wiki).
Macabre: adjective, disturbing because concerned with or causing a fear of death: a macabre series of murders (Oxford).
Seems he gets kicks and makes a living from scaring the sh!t out of people, naturally he’s into climate change™.
From Barton Paul Levenson’s quoted review of the subject book: “It is put out by people who know very well that they are lying . . .”
Of course there is no objective evidence put forward to substantiate this accusation, so hence it stands as a shining example of the logical fallacy of the Strawman Argument.
Thank you, Mr. Levenson, for the contributing to the “dumbing down of humanity”. NOT!
Actually it’s almost certainly libel. Any lawyers here care to comment?
For a “private person” to have standing to bringing a civil suit of libel against another person or organization is relatively straightforward.
However, for a “public figure” to have standing to bring a libel suit against another person or organization is much problematic.
I do believe that Anthony Watts would certainly be classified as a “public figure” by dint of creating and managing the wattsupwiththat.com website and by virtue of his numerous publicly-available talks and videos and written articles.
Similarly, co-author James Taylor would almost certainly be classified as a “public figure” just because he is President of the Heartland Institute.
“In libel cases, plaintiffs who are public figures or officials have to meet a more stringent standard (actual malice) than do private citizens (negligence) if they are to collect damages.
“Thus, the status of a defamation plaintiff often affects the outcome of cases, as the courts balance the right of free press against an individual’s reputation. When it comes to printed defamation (libel), several court decisions have defined public figures, including government officials, as having the burden of proving that defendants libeled them with actual malice.”
source: https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1010/public-figures-and-officials
I am not a lawyer, but my years (and the Web) have given me sufficient reasoning to act like one. 😉
I am not a lawyer either but, the review was designed to deter people from buying an intellectual product thereby causing financial and reputational harm to the authors.
That seems malicious on a both counts and should be subject to damages. Since someone replied that his review was “helpful” that gives credence to the proposition that he was able to cause harm financially and reputationally.
But, Levenson is posting as an individual, not associated with any business or organization, and nowhere in his post does he specifically state words to the effect of “people should not purchase this book”. Levenson only comments “Please keep this trash out of our schools.” . . . and that is correctly seen as a request, not a demand.
So, not matter how vitriolic and unsubstantiated and malicious-sounding his review comment appears to be, IMHO it still falls within the clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution as protected free speech.
Hence, on the whole, one would have a hard time—again IMHO—pursuing a civil lawsuit based on “business interference”.
And I fail to see the logic of your last paragraph . . . (a) there is no way to ascertain if that “someone” really ever intended to buy the subject book, and (b) courts of law have a very hard time with admitting claimed “intentions” of any person outside of the plaintiff or defendant are equivalent to objective evidence.
Perhaps we should leave the legal issues to attorneys.
Since we have first amendment rights to state unsubstantiated and vitriolic comments, perhaps we could find reviews for his books and trash them without reading them to let him know how it feels.
Does the book address the fact that a computer simulation cannot reproduce bad data? I have wondered for a while how many power stations were kept burning to power the supercomputers that attempted to reproduce the hockey stick curve.
I can sum up the whole climate issue if a few short lines:
5000 years ago, there was the Egyptian 1st Unified Kingdom warm period
4400 years ago, there was the Egyptian old kingdom warm period.
3000 years ago, there was the Minoan Warm period. It was warmer than now WITHOUT fossil fuels.
Then 1000 years later, there was the Roman warm period. It was warmer than now WITHOUT fossil fuels.
Then 1000 years later, there was the Medieval warm period. It was warmer than now WITHOUT fossil fuels.
Then 1000 years later, came our current warm period. You are claiming that whatever caused those earlier warm periods suddenly quit causing warm periods, only to be replaced by man’s CO2 emission, perfectly in time for the cycle of warmth every 1000 years to stay on schedule. Not very believable.
The entire climate scam crumbles on this one observation because it shows that there is nothing unusual about today’s temperature and ALL claims of unusual climate are based on claims of excess warmth caused by man’s CO2.
http://www.debunkingclimate.com/warm_periods.html
http://www.debunkingclimate.com/climatehistory.html
http://www.debunkingclimate.com
Feel free to disagree by showing actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing serious global warming.
You are absolutely correct. Any hypothesis that fails to explain past observations is a failure, and this man-made CO2 global warming nonsense is clearly wrong.
Of course you are illuminating the motivation behind the Hockey Stick falsification of the climate record.
The logic of what you said is unassailable, except through natural climate change denial. And that’s why the beady-eyed bloated turd sandwich (Mann of the State Pen) is a natural climate change denier.
There are many sincere Climastrology believers who have been deceived, and others who have deceived themselves, but I cannot be deterred from believing that the infamous Mann knows very clearly that he is deceiving with “Mike’s Nature Trick”.
I tell people that, based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, the climate change we have been experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale to support the conclusion that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. Hence all efforts to reduce CO2 emissions will have no effect on global climate. The AGW hypothesis is based on only partial science and is full of flaws. For example, H2O is suppose to be be the primary greenhouse gas yet adding it to the atmosphere causes surface cooling as evidenced by the fact that the wet lapse rate is significantly less than the dry lapse rate in the troposphere. If adding CO2 to the atmosphere really caused surface warming then one would expect that the increase in CO2 over the past 30 years would have caused at least a measurable increase in the dry lapse rate in the troposphere but that has not happened. The AGW hypotheses is nothing but a false conjecture.
Sold out! 🙁
Ordered from N.Z. Expected arrival Black Friday. Thanks Anthony.
love it keep it up
Just ordered it from Amazon here in the U.K.
No Kindle edition here yet, though.
Must be a shortage of electrons.
“In science, refuting an accepted belief is celebrated as an advance in knowledge; in religion it is condemned as heresy”. (Bob Parks, Physics, U of Maryland). No prizes for guessing how global warming skepticism is normally responded to.
Thanks Anthony and team. Just bought two copies off UK amazon for delivery Thursday.
Looking forward to reading it and sharing it.
“myths put out by the fosil fuel industry …”
Is that all they have? Seriously?
“Fossil fuel industry” conspiracy?
That’s funny and pathetic that alarmists have surrendered in the scientific debate.
Falling back on conspiracy ideation.
They should make a film and call it “Fossil-spiracy”
PS – flagged this as abuse on US Amazon site but Amazon doesn’t have comment box for abuse reports:
” It is put out by people who know very well they are lying, but are doing so for political purposes. ”
To my mind it is libel:
https://study.com/learn/lesson/what-is-libel.html
//
What Is Libel?The definition of libel is a defamatory statement that is published in written words, drawings, cartoons, or physical representation. Legally, libel is a tort, or civil wrong, although in some states it is also viewed as a crime. Those who feel they have been harmed by another can address that harm by filing a civil lawsuit against the individual who published the false statement.
Libel law varies by state, but to prove a statement is libel, one must generally convince the court that:
//
Go get him Anthony!
Logically, it is possible to show that the reviewer is probably lying because what he claims is impossible to know. That is, the reviewer cannot know what another knows or thinks. To claim that he knows what is impossible to know demonstrates that he is lying, or mentally incompetent. He could then, alternatively, plead insanity.
Just ordered this, and have reported Levenson as abuse. When a review is shown, it shows if the reviewer has bought it. It does not show that he has bought it, so the review is fake, in my opinion.
Ordered mine
Regarding the ‘review’ by Barton Paul Levenson:
Anthony Wattts is a meteorologist.
Here’s Levenson’s c.v. on Wikipedia:
‘Barton Paul Levenson (born May 9, 1960) is an American writer of science fiction, fantasy and the macabre.[1] He is author of eight novels and over 80 short stories, articles, reviews and other publications.’
Need more be said?
I’ll be buying the book.
Do I have to buy it from Amazon?
Can your book be bought anywhere other than Amazon? I would prefer an alternative supplier.