The Real Global Warming Disaster: Is the obsession with 'climate change' turning out to be the most costly scientific blunder in history?

The Real Global Warming Disaster: Is the obsession with 'climate change' turning out to be the most costly scientific blunder in history?

by Christopher Booker

NOOK Book(eBook)

$11.49 $19.55 Save 41% Current price is $11.49, Original price is $19.55. You Save 41%.
View All Available Formats & Editions

Available on Compatible NOOK Devices and the free NOOK Apps.
WANT A NOOK?  Explore Now
LEND ME® See Details

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

See All Customer Reviews

The Real Global Warming Disaster: Is the Obsession with 'Climate Change' Turning out to be the Most Costly Scientific Blunder in History? 5 out of 5 based on 0 ratings. 4 reviews.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
This book was fantastic.a must read fpr everyone. Thanks mr. Booker
willyvan More than 1 year ago
This is a very thought-provoking book, though some may find it just provoking. It presents evidence that undermines the claims of the most extreme Green zealots. Yet the book has its flaws too. It has a key misprint: a 7.70C temperature drop, for 0.70C. Don't publishers employ proof-readers any more? Carelessly, Booker writes that 1934 was the world's warmest year, when the research he cites clearly referred to the USA's warmest year. The recent warming is not unprecedented. The Holocene Maximum of 7000-3000 BC, the Roman Warming of 200BC-540AD, the Medieval Warming of 900-1300 were all warmer than now, yet the planet survived. The Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research rejected Freedom of Information requests for data on the weather stations it used. Professor Phil Jones (now head of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia) wrote in 1990 that its stations had 'few, if any changes in instrumentation, location or observation times'. He based this statement on a US Department of Energy report on just 35 of the 84 stations, which had found that fully half of the 35 had been moved! The Met Office consistently predicts more warming than actually happens. For example, using the same computer model that gave the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change its forecasts for 2100, the Met Office forecast that 2007 would be the world's 'warmest year on record', with Britain 'set to enjoy another sizzling summer', that 2008 would be one of the 'top ten warmest years' ever, that 2009 would be one of the 'five warmest years on record', with a 'barbecue summer' in Britain, and that our winter would be 'milder than average'. All wrong: in February it admitted that 2008-9 was 'the coldest winter for 13 years'. We are told that global warming causes an ever-growing number of extreme weather events. Yet hurricane activity was lower in the 2000s than in the 1930s, 1940s or 1950s. The IPCC's 2007 report confirmed, "there is no clear trend in the annual numbers of tropical cyclones." There were seven major droughts between 1900 and 1920, seven between 1921 and 1940, eight between 1941 and 1960, five between 1961 and 1980, but only three between 1981 and 2000. The same IPCC report said, "Antarctic sea ice extent continues to show inter-annual variability and localised changes but no statistically significant average trends, consistent with the lack of warming reflected in atmospheric temperatures averaged across the region. . Current global model studies project that the Antarctic Ice Sheet will remain too cold for widespread surface melting and is expected to gain in mass due to increased snowfall." Coal and nuclear power stations produce 55 per cent of our electricity, wind turbines just 0.5 per cent. Many of these power stations are to be closed down under EU orders, causing a 40 per cent energy shortfall. EU rules allow subsidies for wind farms, but not for nuclear power stations. The government's 2003 White Paper said, "We do not propose new nuclear build." The Climate Change Act of 2008 committed the state "to ensure that the net UK carbon account for 2050 is at least 80 per cent lower than the 1990 baseline." This could only be achieved by closing down the rest of our industry. As Energy Minister John Hutton said in September 2008, "no coal and no nuclear means no power, no future." Brown sacked him two weeks later. This April, the government said no new coal-fired power stations w
RAFERGUSON More than 1 year ago
This is a great read and we tried to find it for our Nook. Unfortunately, it's not available in that format. Interesting, since it IS available for the Kindle..... Can we spell censorship?
Anonymous More than 1 year ago