Scan barcode
iambartacus's review against another edition
3.0
It started off as a really interesting book, but it got repetitive after a while and I lost interest. Could also be that it brought back terrible memories of reading the entire 2007 IPCC report and writing a long paper on it. Either way, definitely a book I wish I would have skimmed. The topic is interesting. The presentation? Not so much.
archytas's review
4.0
The story Schneider describes is probably on of the most important stories of our era - the story of how climate scientists first figured out there was something wrong, and how climate science evolved to understand what. The tale is certainly never dry or boring, and if Schneider's self-confessed conceitedness gets irritating after a while, his insistence on acknowledging his opinions makes the book more readable, not less. Unsurprisingly Schneider believes scientists should express their views, arguing in one of the most compelling parts of the book that objectivity emerges from a meeting of perspectives, not individuals purging biases, or denying their existence.
The book flits through various topics, while focusing on a couple of main themes - the destructiveness of a soundbite culture, and the complexity of climate science among them. The lack of detail on such key topics as the science itself, the difficulties in forming the IPCC, and the failure of anyone other than Schneider to emerge with any personality hold the book back from being as great a read as i was hoping for.
But it remains thought provoking enough. Reading the book, I kept thinking of the analogy of a group of physicists watching a motorcyclist speeding towards a low wall. It is very hard to predict where the motorcyclist will end up after hitting the wall, but not hard to predict that it will be a significant negative impact. Only different because climate change doesn't constitute a specific event, naturally.
The most depressing part of the book is its optimism. Writing in 2009, Schneider is convinced the battle for public opinion is won for now. His tragic death freezes that optimism in time - I only hope that coming years do not find it misplaced.
The book flits through various topics, while focusing on a couple of main themes - the destructiveness of a soundbite culture, and the complexity of climate science among them. The lack of detail on such key topics as the science itself, the difficulties in forming the IPCC, and the failure of anyone other than Schneider to emerge with any personality hold the book back from being as great a read as i was hoping for.
But it remains thought provoking enough. Reading the book, I kept thinking of the analogy of a group of physicists watching a motorcyclist speeding towards a low wall. It is very hard to predict where the motorcyclist will end up after hitting the wall, but not hard to predict that it will be a significant negative impact. Only different because climate change doesn't constitute a specific event, naturally.
The most depressing part of the book is its optimism. Writing in 2009, Schneider is convinced the battle for public opinion is won for now. His tragic death freezes that optimism in time - I only hope that coming years do not find it misplaced.
More...