New Feature: Book Review Page

Just like the sortable Video page we rolled out three weeks ago, we have added a book review page.

You have the ability to sort via date, importance (subjective value), topic, author, or organization, either ascending or descending.

Send book review suggestions to:

Let us know what you think.

4.6 9 votes
Article Rating
30 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dave Fair
July 30, 2022 2:35 pm

Thanks for the resources Charles/Anthony. I usually, however, just rely on memory to get myself into trouble with Trolls.

Last edited 15 days ago by Dave Fair
July 30, 2022 2:46 pm

I suggest you also review

Cotton, W.R. and R.A. Pielke Sr., 2007: Human impacts on weather and climate,Cambridge University Press, 330 pp.

Reply to  Charles Rotter
July 30, 2022 6:41 pm

I don’t recall but in any case, those reviews would be dated. It would be best to be reviewed in the context of our 2022 understanding of this issue.

Best Regards

Roger Sr

Editor
Reply to  Roger Pielke Sr
July 30, 2022 8:34 pm

There are two reviews at Amazon Books, LINK

Rud Istvan
July 30, 2022 3:05 pm

Somebody please review my 2014 ebook Blowing Smoke: Essays on Energy and Climate, with foreword by Judith Curry. Available cheap on iBooks and Kindle.

Charles, you should post any of the many good comment reviews here some time ago on Koonin’s book Unsettled. Or maybe combine some of them into a longer review (I’ll volunteer if you want a combination.) Hyperlink to that WUWT post to show we here are on this stuff in quasi real time.

Another good review would be of Susan Crockford’s book (for adults) on polar bears. I think she posted some reviews already on her blog.

And you are free to post my essay review of the 2014 National Climate Assessment, chapter 1– for this new WUWT endeavor, I hereby waive copyright. It was all falsehoods and distortions deliberately done by no less than 14 participating US government agencies. If you need a copy, give a shout and I will pull it up from the ebook final essay drafts as submitted to my publisher. Don’t think they did any post submission editing—if so, was minimal.

I will compose and send you a review of Steyn’s book ‘Disgrace to the Profession’ on Michael Mann, ‘volume 1’. Will include the background history plus a hyperlink to the video clip of the Congressional hearing Curry/Mann exchange, just for grins. Give me a few days on that, because I want the review to be as sardonic as Steyn was himself. And that is hard to be.

Just some initial thoughts on a late Saturday afternoon after my customary pre dinner bourbon. Maybe review Jim Steele’s book Landscapes and Cycles. Maybe review Anthony’s new book. Maybe a (very negative) review of Oreskes ‘Merchants of Doubt’— I will volunteer for that one if nobody else does, as her premise is absolute legal BS.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 30, 2022 3:37 pm

Being a fan of Dr. Koonin’s book, I elsewhere wrote three different posts about it. I’m not sure they were precisely book reviews, though.

Editor
Reply to  Joe Born
July 30, 2022 8:43 pm

Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters Hardcover – April 27, 2021

He has 3,680 reviews with average 4.7 out of 5 rating.

LINK

Editor
Reply to  Sunsettommy
July 31, 2022 1:21 pm

SunSet ==> Pielke Jr slashed Koonin’s book in the New Atlantis writing a piece titled Stuck Between Climate Doom and Denial.

Why he did so is a mystery.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
August 1, 2022 2:33 am

The large number of negative reviews on the Koonin book convinced me to feature many positive reviews of the book on my climate science and energy blog even though I never read the book. Leftist climate alarmists always attack the best climate realists — being attacked by them is an honor — their anger towards, and character attacks on, Koonin are a very favorable book review, in my opinion.

I read te first 10 pages of the book and decided not to buy it. There were some disturbing errors in those 10 pages. Also, I’m a cheapskate, and books are very expensive.

The basic claim that climate alarmists say science is settled is false, Al Gore said that, but he is a doofus, not a scientist. The junk science of the government climate scientists is unsettling, but not settled. It seems like every week there are more “studies” claiming new negative effects of climate change, new predictions of doom and revised predictions of doom (it’s worse than we thought”). This is VERY FAR from settled science.
It is the constant throwing of mud at a wall, and hoping it sticks. Overwhelming climate realists with fake bad climate news published faster than they can refute it.

Another error I found, and others may consider this minor, but Koonin claimed humans had no proven effect on US hurricanes. That is false. Humans invented weather satellites which increased detection of hurricanes in the 1980s and beyond. So the best statistic is US hurricanes that made landfall, very likely to have eyewitnesses, rather than a count of all Atlantic Ocean hurricanes.

Of course the Climate Howlers use the count of all hurricanes, with that detection bias, because when there is a choice of datasets, they always choose the one that favors their coming climate crisis narrative. Or they revise data, or truncate data, or just make up tall tales and claim they are science, because they were
published by a scientist.

Data selection bias is why the climate howlers have never recognized UAH temperature data and don’t even fund its collection anymore. That’s why US forest fire acres burned are truncated before the low decade in the 1970s. Leftist climate howlers are very predictable: Lie, deceive, truncate data, revise data, omit facts and data, and keep the opposition on the defense with constant character attacks. Applies to every subject.

Editor
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 30, 2022 8:40 pm

You have 19 reviews at Amazon Books LINK

Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 31, 2022 8:32 am
Rud Istvan
Reply to  Mike Dombroski
July 31, 2022 2:18 pm

Thanks much. Charles can run with that.

Redge
July 31, 2022 12:28 am

Could I suggest adding reviews of books by the watermelons?

I haven’t checked the Book Review page yet so apologies if there are some

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Redge
July 31, 2022 2:27 pm

Good idea. I will work on Oreskes Merchants of Doubt next.

Danley Wolfe
July 31, 2022 8:20 am

Good additional feature.

July 31, 2022 8:40 am

I must say, I’m a little confused. Are you asking for links to reviews? Do you want us to submit suggestions for links or write actual reviews?

Editor
Reply to  Mike Dombroski
July 31, 2022 1:24 pm

Mike ==> I think that Anthony is looking for serious professional reviews of important CliSci books…

Not just Pal Review style books, not dashed-off “buy my friends book” reviews, but reviews that would inform readers of relative strong and weak points of various skeptical CliSci books that would help a reader select what to read.

[Anthony or Charles: correct me if I’m wrong here….]

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Kip Hansen
July 31, 2022 2:27 pm

Kip, my general assumption also. Sort of like the pros and cons topics pages, except book rather than topic oriented. That how I am approaching ‘discredit to the profession’ by Steyn.

Michael ElliottMichael Elliott
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 31, 2022 4:18 pm

Ìs there a book which tells us who or what is really behind the whole farce of The end of the World.

Being a old man who lived through “” The Reds under the Bed”” of the 1950 tees, I recall the tactics of the then USSR of telling the World how wonderfully their way of life was.

But refused to allow people to leave “Paradese”.

Having followed the development of “Cli.ate” ever since the 1960 tees book “Silent Spring”, then the creation of the IPCC, it was obvious that it was a case of first destroy a economy, then offer people your version of a ” Brave New World”

Call it Communism or Fachism.

It’s all about power & control.

Michael VK5ELL

TheLastDemocrat
Reply to  Michael ElliottMichael Elliott
August 1, 2022 7:49 am

Where did the Catastrophe End of the World politics develop? These ideas have always been out there. But there was a major zeitgeist that arose once the Nukular Bomb was developed.

The Nukular Bomb awed those developing it, and awed others. One “take” was: we can destroy so much at once, but do we have the humanity and ethics to manage this terrible power? The answer was “probably not.” And, the answers usually have some form of, “we must all band together across the globe to reduce the threat of Planetary Destruction.”

Harrison Brown was one of these “Manhattan Project” scientists. He wrote “Must Destruction Be Our Destiny?” in 1945. This explores the “we must bad together across the globe” answer.

H Brown was obviously brilliant. He was involved with others, including Clair Patterson, as they developed isotope analysis to try to determine the age of things far older than our human records have recorded. Patterson, supported by Brown and others, came up with Lead – Lead isotope dating, of a meteorite, to decide Earth is 4.5 billion years old. [I am distrustful that this isotope dating work as planned, but it is very clever.]

With the power to destroy an entire nation seemingly plausible, and a very old universe, Many threw God out of the mix.

This is an ingredient in all of this Enviro-Geddon talk.

In 1954, Brown wrote, “The Challenge of Man’s Future.” He moved from the topic of Nukular Destruction to overpopulation, environmental ruin, etc.

Many people began to puck up on this theme. Again, it was really a zeitgeist.

M.K. Hubbert, maybe a theoretical physicist, great with math, examined the extinguishing of natural resources, and came up with “Peak Oil.” Brown may have known this work before the Ground Zero paper on Peak Oil was presented in 1956, two years after Brown “The Challenge of Man’s Future.”

Paul Ehrlich wrote “Population Bomb” in 1968. John Holdren joined up with Ehrlich. I believe Holdren has acknowledged Brown as a major influence. Ehrlich, Holdren, and Anne Ehrlich wrote “Ecoscience,” something of an ecology “textbook,” in 1978. If you goo gle search for this, you will see how totalitarian they were, with ideas such as putting birth control in the water supply.

What this bit of history says, in my opinion, is that our modern concern with human ruin of the planet, and or overpopulation, really start with the Nukular Age. Many of us began taking a very different view of the world, politics, war, the planet, human nature, etc.

It also says, in my opinion, that a major force has been scientists getting out of their lane. There are a hundred books out there from medical doctors saying “what is wrong with the health care system, and how to solve it.” Likewise, there are many Nukular scientists deciding they will play politics. And, they have inspired sociologists, etc. Out of their lane. Expert in one topic does not make you expert in another.

It also says: the many predictions of catastrophe are not as solid as people believe. Peak oil was supposed to be in 1970, per Hubbert.

Finally, it says: the average public will pay attention to “scientist says.” Says we are headed for “environmental collapse, global cooling, global warming, etc.

Get an old copy of Brown’s “The Challenge of Man’s Future.” 1954. Maybe someone can review this.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Michael ElliottMichael Elliott
August 1, 2022 2:32 pm

The closest I have found is ‘Blue Planet in Green Chains’ by former Czech Republic president Vaclav Klaus. Published in 2007. That book is what inspired my creation of ‘warmunists’ for the climate alarmists. Footnote 24 (I just checked) to essay Climatastrosophistry in ebook Blowing Smoke.

TheLastDemocrat
Reply to  Rud Istvan
August 2, 2022 10:06 am

I have been a life-long Democrat. [The Party has left me, hence I am The Last Democrat.]

In 2005-2008, I noticed strong, cult-like, rabid adherence to crazy ideas including global warming, from my long -time friends and colleagues, which were pretty clearly known since we were all on Face book.

I sparred with some of them a bit on various issues, including global warming. Around 2008, I discovered Watts Surface Stations project, and so found WUWT. So, I was well-educated. But facts and so on had no place in these discussions or debates.

I figured out that something other than just being a liberal, and wanting the world to be a better place, was operating.

I explored what people were saying, and why. Including what they were for, and against. I figured out that many intelligent, reasonable, decent people had ended up in what I labeled a “Virtue Cult.”

It was not a religious cult, with a Revelation / Armageddon End-Of-World leader like we think of; instead, the goal was to be Virtuous by having heard and joined up with the Right Ideas, while realizing that Everyone Else was either Ignorant or Evil.

This is the appeal of a cult. And, a cult is a cult partly by inspiring people to be one of the Chosen Few who know the Real Truth, but it is a cult because the Cult Views DO NOT match up with reality.

Since a cult has views that do not match up with reality, examining them with rationality and evidence will quickly reveal the illogic.

So, any cult must protect against its members examining how the cult view of the world does not match reality.

They produce thinking patterns, and repeat them, to be innoculated against the real world, logic, and truth. The two main “discourse” strategies are: Move the Goalposts, and Name-Calling.

As you get into a debate or discussion with a True Believer, look for these. Decide your point and stick to it; do not let them drag you through 100 various weak data points or ideas. Then, identify that they have changed the goalposts, or have engaged in name-calling.

Then, tell them: “since you have lef the disucssion by moving to change-the-goalposts or name-calling, I have won the argument. Global warming is a flase story meant to get political power from us. and that is the end of the debate here today. Or, let’s get back to facts and data and logic.”

They will attack you with accusations, or storm off. They can ignore facts and discussion because you are either Ignorant or Evil. So, you do not deserve the effort of discussion.

I posted this Virtue Cult idea here, and mostly here alone. Back in maybe 2009. Since then, the Cult idea has grown.

Now, on the “Left” many are labeling those who disagree with them as “cult.”

Beyond this Virtue Cult insight, I pondered what was behind this.

The answer I arrived at was “Communism / Marxism.”

To the Marxists, Enemy Number One is Our Prevailing Society. So, they are driven to undercut our prevailing society. Eventually, they believe we will all join in revolution and install Communism, and all be happy.

To undercut Our Prevailing Society, they have two methods. First is The Virtue Cult. How did they figure this out? Fromm and other Communists studied Social Sciences very well. Especially “persuasion,” and how we each form political opinions.

My circa 1985 Government class, taught by a grad student, was all about Fromm and attitude change. And, very anti-Reagan. As I was. So, it was palatable to me. I did not know I was being taught frank Communism.

In Sociology class, it was all an expose of The Protestant Work Ethic, via Max Weber – another Communist. Weber and my prof believed that all of us “buy into” this idea about hard work and personal responsibility b eing sold to us by some master capitalist controllers.

Communists figured out how our society works. The nuts and bolts of family, church, economics, opinions, media, etc.

And they have been taking that knowledge and using it against us. To destroy Our Prevailing Society.

So, I agree that it is the Reds behind the Green movement.

Editor
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 31, 2022 5:21 pm

Rud ==> Good luck on that one — that book is a hit job….and whitewashing it may be hard…just my opinion.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Kip Hansen
August 1, 2022 2:24 pm

Kip I know. But when you give the background, the Steyn hit job makes perfect sense. And there is stuff in the intro which none of it was fabricated

Editor
Reply to  Rud Istvan
August 1, 2022 3:24 pm

Rud ==> Didn’t mean to imply that he made stuff up — but a hit job is a hit job, not a dis-interested journalistic report. (Not that I am totally innocent of such writing….)

Jim Gorman
August 1, 2022 7:02 am

As requested, I have forwarded Anthony my book review of Confessions of a climate scientist by Mototaka Nakamura.

I wouldn’t say it was a “professional” review and feel free to edit it anyway you need.

August 1, 2022 7:47 am

Andy May’s articles on the catastrophe narrative and how this is absent from professional climate science (though activists falsely claim that doom is in the science – it’s not) are excellent and extremely important. Has Andy developed this into a book? He should.

Here’s a title suggestion: “The emperor’s new catastrophe” A. May

Michael ElliottMichael Elliott
Reply to  Phil Salmon
August 1, 2022 1:24 pm

While the invention of the Atom Bomb would cause many people to think that its all over, there was a positive factor.

For the first time the Hawks of our society realised that a major war was now almost unthinkable.

The doctrin of MAD, where no one country could hope to win came into being.

In the period 1945 to 1950 as General Paton said, ” We have been fighting the wrong country”.

He realised that having destroyed one ever we had created another.

The USSR was just as potentially as dangerous to the idea of World Peace as was Hitler.

So instead of another World War, instead we had & still have “Proxy Wars,” the latest one being Ukraine.

A good way to test one’s new weapons just as the Isreali- Arab ones, & before that the Spainish Civil War.

This enabled the Germans to test the ME 109, & polish their air combat skills such as the tactic of the Finger Four rather than the RAF’s dated V formation flying.

Michael VK5ELL

August 4, 2022 1:10 pm

I suggest a review of

Climate Change: Reasons to Worry Less
by Steve McGee

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09BCGLTVV

%d bloggers like this: