Nonfiction

Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All

Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All

  • Downloads：9460
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-05-18 11:54:37
  • Update Date：2025-09-06
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Michael Shellenberger
  • ISBN：0063001691
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

Michael Shellenberger has been fighting for a greener planet for decades。 He helped save the world’s last unprotected redwoods。 He co-created the predecessor to today’s Green New Deal。 And he led a successful effort by climate scientists and activists to keep nuclear plants operating， preventing a spike of emissions。

But in 2019， as some claimed “billions of people are going to die，” contributing to rising anxiety， including among adolescents， Shellenberger decided that， as a lifelong environmental activist， leading energy expert， and father of a teenage daughter， he needed to speak out to separate science from fiction。

Despite decades of news media attention， many remain ignorant of basic facts。 Carbon emissions peaked and have been declining in most developed nations for over a decade。 Deaths from extreme weather， even in poor nations， declined 80 percent over the last four decades。 And the risk of Earth warming to very high temperatures is increasingly unlikely thanks to slowing population growth and abundant natural gas。

Curiously， the people who are the most alarmist about the problems also tend to oppose the obvious solutions。

What’s really behind the rise of apocalyptic environmentalism？ There are powerful financial interests。 There are desires for status and power。 But most of all there is a desire among supposedly secular people for transcendence。 This spiritual impulse can be natural and healthy。 But in preaching fear without love， and guilt without redemption， the new religion is failing to satisfy our deepest psychological and existential needs。

Download

Reviews

Dav ，

。Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us Allby Michael Shellenberger， pub。 in 2020， less than 300 pages。Overview:"An environmental expert unleashes a scientific， fact-based broadside against eco-alarmism and the excesses of the left， arguing that climate change and other environmental problems are real but not apocalyptic and require practical， not radical， solutions。Many environmentalists claim the world as we know it will soon come to an end unless we radically change how we live 。Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us Allby Michael Shellenberger， pub。 in 2020， less than 300 pages。Overview:"An environmental expert unleashes a scientific， fact-based broadside against eco-alarmism and the excesses of the left， arguing that climate change and other environmental problems are real but not apocalyptic and require practical， not radical， solutions。Many environmentalists claim the world as we know it will soon come to an end unless we radically change how we live our lives。 They demand we stop eating meat， ban plastics， and significantly reduce how much we drive and fly。 Climate change is real， says Michael Shellenberger in Apocalypse Never， but it’s not the end of the world。 It is not even our most serious environmental problem。 Most environmental trends， including population， pollution， and resource use， are all going in the right direction。 The left profits from hyping climate change as apocalypse while opposing obvious solutions。 Schemes like “The Green New Deal” would transfer wealth to well-connected elites， raise energy costs， and hurt wildlife。 Poverty， not prosperity， is the real enemy of the environment。 We can produce more food using less land and water， move from wood to coal to natural gas to nuclear， and safely capture and contain plastic waste。 But all of that will require standing up to the eco-alarmism in the way of environmental protection。"Since the author refutes the disaster forecast by the likes of AOC ['the world is going to end in 12 years']， he's been lumped in with the political right and others labeled as "climate deniers。" Deniers is actually just a pejorative used by the alarmists to discredit anyone who doesn't support their end of the world scenario。 Like the author， we who refute alarmism: "。。。care about getting the facts and science right。"The author writes: "Much of what people are being told about the environment， including the climate， is wrong， and we desperately need to get it right。 I decided to write Apocalypse Never after getting fed up with the exaggeration， alarmism， and extremism that are the enemy of a positive， humanistic， and rational environmentalism。"。。。 。。。more

Byron ，

Everyone should read this book。 It’s well-thought out， written by an environmentalist， that calls out the hypocrisy of the media and agenda-driven special interests， to promote what’s best for humanity。 Michael’s practical nuclear energy solution as a way to provide zero emissions， and back away from the religion of renewables/worshipping mother-earth is very compelling。

Stephanie Walters ，

Enlightening The book is a wake up call to apocalyptic environmentalists。 It comes with factual references to very good data to support Shellenberger‘s findings。 In today’s world， I feel like were trapped by the feelings of many people in environmentalists who really don’t know the facts and supporting data。 This is a very optimistic view forward for the human race and this earth。

Shiva ，

Very thought-provoking， well-researched， and well-considered。。。would recommend for anyone working on or interested in climate and environmental issues。 Definitely made me think a lot about what meaningful humanist efforts and solutions on climate and the environment， that honestly account for the tradeoffs of various approaches in the multitude of global and economic contexts people face， should look like。

Ann G ，

Recognizes how good intentions can be led astray。

W。 Don ，

Disclosure: I am a semi-retired professional engineer who made a great living from the application of nuclear technology。For decades， many environmental activists have been fundamentally opposed to nuclear energy。 As a nuclear professional I don't understand this opposition。 But for more than 40 years I have seen the courts， poorly written laws and regulations， innuendo and smear tactics， biased media and elected officials， and even outright lies being used effectively against the deployment and Disclosure: I am a semi-retired professional engineer who made a great living from the application of nuclear technology。For decades， many environmental activists have been fundamentally opposed to nuclear energy。 As a nuclear professional I don't understand this opposition。 But for more than 40 years I have seen the courts， poorly written laws and regulations， innuendo and smear tactics， biased media and elected officials， and even outright lies being used effectively against the deployment and use of technology that I understand， respect， and value。 I have ceased trying to explain and educate the general public， because I have become convinced （and a bit cynical） that until the general public in the USA is seriously inconvenienced by the lack of readily accessible and reliable and cost effective electrical energy， they will not undertake the effort and work to understand nuclear technology and push for necessary policy changes。Then I discovered Michael Shellenberger。Mr。 Shellenberger has had a passion for the environment all his adult life， and has advocated actively for sound environmental practices。 But it recent years he has became a powerful advocate for nuclear power after doing the research and study， and being willingly to learn。 Perhaps the general public might listen to him， whereas they will generally not listen to industry technical experts， even those of credible and independent voices。I have found Mr。 Shellenberger's insights to be technically accurate， well researched and documented， and sound。 For example， this book contains 285 pages of narrative， and over 100 pages of notes and citations for those who are inclined to greater study and to test his conclusions。I highly recommend this book to serious readers who are interested both in protecting the environment for ourselves and our grandchildren， as well as to provide for and assist the majority of peoples in third world countries around the world today who desperately need reliable， accessible， and affordable energy to raise their standard of living， quality of life and lifespan， and to lift themselves and their cultures out of the deadly cycle of deep poverty。 。。。more

Graeme Roberts ，

I will post a review of this vitally important book shortly。

sam ，

This is a must read if you care about people， climate， the environment， science and factsReasons I think you should read the book areThe author comes from the far left environmental movement and knows all the characters and their history of lies and exaggerations。The author has decades of world wide on the ground involvement in social development and makes a strong case that climate change is best abated by raising standards of living through modern electrical power/grids and tractors， fertilize This is a must read if you care about people， climate， the environment， science and factsReasons I think you should read the book areThe author comes from the far left environmental movement and knows all the characters and their history of lies and exaggerations。The author has decades of world wide on the ground involvement in social development and makes a strong case that climate change is best abated by raising standards of living through modern electrical power/grids and tractors， fertilizers and advanced crops to facilitate smaller farms， reduced wood burning， increased urbanization and reduce land take that is killing indigenous/endangered species。 And it happens to be the humanitarian thing to do that also leads to reduction in population growth。Similarly， the land take of solar and wind has large negative impacts on indigenous/endangered species。The risks of Nuclear power are greatly and intentionally exaggerated resulting in unthinking rejection of the serious CO2 reduction opportunities。The motivation of environmental extremists may be rooted in their psychological need to believe their actions provide lasting meaning and impact。 And similar to religion， if science/facts gets in the way they deny it （and persecute it’s practitioners） for the greater good of their mission。 。。。more

Jeffrey ，

First， I listened to Apocalypse Never。 The organizational structure of the book is a little confusing in an audio format。 The chapters are all numbered， and then each chapter has subsections that are also numbered。 A couple of time I thought some how I had skipped back to an earlier chapter on accident， but it was not hard to figure out what was happening very quickly。 This is a very minor complaint but it did annoy me a little。 Also， I would really like to have seen the footnoting （I am assumin First， I listened to Apocalypse Never。 The organizational structure of the book is a little confusing in an audio format。 The chapters are all numbered， and then each chapter has subsections that are also numbered。 A couple of time I thought some how I had skipped back to an earlier chapter on accident， but it was not hard to figure out what was happening very quickly。 This is a very minor complaint but it did annoy me a little。 Also， I would really like to have seen the footnoting （I am assuming the print version had footnoting） and be able to vet sources。 If my assumption is correct， this is not a knock against the book， but rather the format。Second， I found Apocalypse Never to be rational and compelling。 Shellenberger lays our the case for a more engage and committed form of environmentalism/conservationism than I have previously engaged in。 However， his arguments seem much more rational than the arguments presented by those that would have us believe climate change is a looming apocalyptic event。 Shellenberger in not contending that climate change is not a serious problem; rather he suggests that it is not world-ending and that human technical progress holds the answers。 He endorses an energy dense future for humanity that will enrich the poorest nations， reduce the effects of carbon emissions， and address environmental issues that he contends are of greater impact than climate change （e。g。 increasing habitat for wild animals）。 He suggests that we as a worldwide society need to move developing nations away from biomass fuels to hydroelectric energy where possible and to coal or， better yet， to natural gas when hydro power is not an option as each is cleaner than biomass。 We then need to move those nations to nuclear energy。 During this time， industrialized nations need to make a big shift to nuclear。His arguments make so much sense to me。 Now I need to read someone’s work that is trying to specifically rebut his points and see if they still make sense to me。 。。。more

Gabriel Stein ，

Very goodAn excellent antidote to those who claim that the only answer to climate change is to make us all poorer。 Yes， climate change is there， yes， much of it man made， but the apocalypse is not there and there are solutions – beginning with using nuclear energy。

John Crippen ，

Shellenberger， a pro-nuclear environmentalist， has saved trees and now he's trying to save nuclear power plants。 With chapter titles like "Earth's Lungs Aren't Burning"，"Sweatshops Save the Planet"， and "Greed Saved the Whales， Not Greenpeace"， the book is pretty confrontational。 The odd thing is that a lot of what he writes could be rallying points for climate change deniers， but that's not what Shellenberger is trying to provide， at all。 He makes an argument that we need to find a way for natu Shellenberger， a pro-nuclear environmentalist， has saved trees and now he's trying to save nuclear power plants。 With chapter titles like "Earth's Lungs Aren't Burning"，"Sweatshops Save the Planet"， and "Greed Saved the Whales， Not Greenpeace"， the book is pretty confrontational。 The odd thing is that a lot of what he writes could be rallying points for climate change deniers， but that's not what Shellenberger is trying to provide， at all。 He makes an argument that we need to find a way for nature and humans to continue to co-exist， and that that way must include continuing to allow humans to prosper and flourish。 。。。more

Jenn Adams ，

Short version: Don't read this。。。Only slightly longer: I was hoping for something like "climate change is a significant danger to our future but being alarmist doesn't help as much as x， y， z would"。 Instead， this felt like when you have a conclusion and scrounge around for facts that support it and ignore anything else。 Lots of bad science。 Bad faith arguments。 Boo。Goodreads Choice Nom 2020 Short version: Don't read this。。。Only slightly longer: I was hoping for something like "climate change is a significant danger to our future but being alarmist doesn't help as much as x， y， z would"。 Instead， this felt like when you have a conclusion and scrounge around for facts that support it and ignore anything else。 Lots of bad science。 Bad faith arguments。 Boo。Goodreads Choice Nom 2020 。。。more

Janell ，

This book was a pleather of facts。 I highly recommend reading to get a complex education on the environment。 Definitely changed my mind on a few issues and sources of energy in the world we live。 I enjoyed the comprehensive review of many regions of our world。

Eclaghorn ，

Antidote for the disease of environmental alarmism。 Well researched/documented and exposes the corruption of environmental activism。 Even explains the psychology of environmentists。

Jesse Field ，

I approached this book skeptically， but it temporarily won me over。 The central claim turned out to be， not that climate change is a hoax， but rather a view I have long held: climate change is quite real， but won't cause the end of civilization， and the world's governments and societies must balance bringing down emissions and pollution while continuing urbanization， increased education， and major infrastructure building。 However， on further reading， suspect propositions pop up here and there。 A I approached this book skeptically， but it temporarily won me over。 The central claim turned out to be， not that climate change is a hoax， but rather a view I have long held: climate change is quite real， but won't cause the end of civilization， and the world's governments and societies must balance bringing down emissions and pollution while continuing urbanization， increased education， and major infrastructure building。 However， on further reading， suspect propositions pop up here and there。 And by the end， they seem to have multiplied into a legion of niggling questions， errors， possible errors， all of which leave us flabbergasted and wishing for a better book on this topic。 Are wind and solar power as unreliable has Shellenberger argues？ And what about projected improvements to renewables？ Are extinction rates no greater than the background rate？ Really， plastic does break down after all， so it's not a huge problem？ And does Schellenberger want to trash all 17 of the UN Sustainable Development goals， or just some of them？ It's somewhat impressive that there is something in here to upset nearly any reader。 It's not even like the conservative members of my family would be able to honestly use the book to oppose environmental alarmism， since it wouldn't overcome their skepticism to the dangers of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons。I've long been sympathetic to the potential for more nuclear energy， at least in the United States and other countries that can afford the start-up costs。 I'm personally fascinated by nuclear power plants and waste-disposal systems， and would just love to tour the facilities down the road， at Daya Bay， Shenzhen， China。 But Shellenberger says， flatly and without so much as argument， much less evidence， that nuclear power is waste-free， and safe。 And unlikely to ever come under terrorist attack。 （He also thinks there is little chance of war between India and Pakistan， and little chance of nuclear war in general。 Because that would be crazy， is the reasoning。 He also gives credit to Kennedy for saving the day during the Cuban Missile Crisis because JFK turned down Curtis LeMay's strategy of using nuclear weapons。 Which， okay， let's just put aside how crazy Kennedy arguably was in his covert war against Cuba; that General LeMay was bonkers is a truth universally acknowledged。 So doesn't that mean that as long as any more LeMays exist， nuclear war， however crazy， could happen？） It actually seems strange to me that Shellenberger struck such a strident and dogmatic tone on this matter， as it makes him sound like nothing so much as a paid advocate of the nuclear industry。 But even then， it's puzzling that we are given so little evidence for the claims。 Back to the anti-alarmist rhetoric。 I'm sympathetic to this， too。 Bill McKibben and 350。org and all the other 'alarmists' are indeed annoying because the rhetoric at their level overlooks the concerns of communities across the USA and the world。 Poor people around the world need infrastructure and urban life， with electricity， clean water， bathrooms， gas stoves， sewer systems。 And that is not only more important than the parts per million of CO2 in the air， but the path to bringing down carbon will likely require us to go through ending poverty first so the societies of the world can themselves better manage how to reduce emissions。 McKibben， Grunberg， et。 al。， likely mean well， but come off as talking down to both developing nations and the working and middle classes of the developed countries。 It is juicy gossip indeed if 350。org are in fact funded by the oil industry so that environmentalists and conservatives effectively form a coalition against nuclear power。 And something like that seems plausible in California， where nuclear plants were opposed by state governments evidently in bed with petroleum industry。 But what about the nuclear industry？ Is it only a victim？ Has it ever done a shady thing to win state or government contracts？ Hm？ We must look elsewhere for anything about that。 Meanwhile， like Mercutio， we can only stand to one side and say， "A plague on both your houses。" It's all corrupt state capitalism， anyway。The political blindspot in Shellenberger's gaze is most noticeable when he talks about factory girls。 Compare with Noam Chomsky's description factory girls， those pioneers of urbanization and economic development: Chomsky emphasizes the patterns of exploitation they face， and the remarkable resilience they show， not only in caring for their families， but in organizing for a better future。 The path to urbanization is also a path to alienation and wage slavery unless labor organizers resist。 In Shellenberger's profile of "Suparti，" a factory girl in Indonesia， the explicit message is that the factory job is better than rural poverty， so the incoming migrant labor should simply keep her head down， work hard， and rise through the ranks。 It's Lean In: Women， Work， and the Will to Lead for the country side。 Whether it means to be or not， this view is border-line reactionary and does nothing to acknowledge the true social and political complexities of the Global South。 I guess this book is Food for Thought。 But not quite recommended on its own merits。 It is absolutely fascinating to read the reviews on Goodreads and in the mainstream media， however。 Perhaps the book is worth its asking price just as a conversation starter， something to make all of us check our facts， and our values。 。。。more

Bob Manning ，

The author， who has been an environmental activist his entire adult life， writes about how todays activists often exaggerate the potential danger of climate warming and other environmental issues。 He points out the negative effects of these exaggerations。 He also uncovers why some organizations are funding these environmental groups。 Like why Greenpeace and the Sierra Club are funded by oil and gas companies。

Jim Breslin ，

I don't recommend this book。 The premise is that some environmentalists have become alarmists， portraying climate change as an imminent existential crisis， and that we overlook the vast benefits of natural gas and nuclear power。 While there may be some logic to this， Shellenberger's case is made through very weakly linked observations and I didn't find him credible。 Saying "In the same year。。。" does not necessarily mean the two theories are connected。 At one point， Shellenberger uses a quote att I don't recommend this book。 The premise is that some environmentalists have become alarmists， portraying climate change as an imminent existential crisis， and that we overlook the vast benefits of natural gas and nuclear power。 While there may be some logic to this， Shellenberger's case is made through very weakly linked observations and I didn't find him credible。 Saying "In the same year。。。" does not necessarily mean the two theories are connected。 At one point， Shellenberger uses a quote attributed to a critic on Twitter。 I laughed out loud。 EVERYONE is a critic on Twitter。 The continual bashing of environmentalists with differing views are tiresome and I had hoped towards the end of the book Shellenberger would lay out his vision for a future， but he just ended the book with a story of feeling a connection with a gorilla。 Ugh。 。。。more

Sita Matthews ，

I found this book helped me really think through the issues on our planet， that solving Climate Change is a complex beast that may need a different approach to solve。 Michael gives a sense of hope， which helps when we feel overwhelmed by hopelessness on the topic

Harold R。 ，

Well worth the read。

Ed Yao ，

All climate advocates should read this book to get a more nuanced understanding of the complexity and hype around the climate debate。 The author makes well-articulated arguments FOR nuclear and natural gas technologies。 Slowing growth in developing economies is neither ethical nor practical as a way to reduce C02 emissions。My one complaint is that， like many climate books， this became too philosophical near the end。 The author， unfortunately， clearly also has an ax to grind against hardcore envi All climate advocates should read this book to get a more nuanced understanding of the complexity and hype around the climate debate。 The author makes well-articulated arguments FOR nuclear and natural gas technologies。 Slowing growth in developing economies is neither ethical nor practical as a way to reduce C02 emissions。My one complaint is that， like many climate books， this became too philosophical near the end。 The author， unfortunately， clearly also has an ax to grind against hardcore environmentalists。 There’s much that I disagree with， but his pragmatism is refreshing。 。。。more

Danielle Crawford ，

This book is a cherry-pickers dream。 The author references starving polar bears but not severely declining caribou populations。 He talks about how damming rivers is great for humans， but does not describe how these interventions change fish populations or impact the ecology of the river downstream。 He believes that nitrogen fertilizer is all that is required for good agricultural practices， never referencing that carbon stored in soils has declined since modern agricultural practices have been e This book is a cherry-pickers dream。 The author references starving polar bears but not severely declining caribou populations。 He talks about how damming rivers is great for humans， but does not describe how these interventions change fish populations or impact the ecology of the river downstream。 He believes that nitrogen fertilizer is all that is required for good agricultural practices， never referencing that carbon stored in soils has declined since modern agricultural practices have been enacted。 He clearly believes that we can use technology to climb out of the climate crisis， which he also doesn't really believe exists。 He thinks that sacrificing entire species for human progress is the greater good and that we will save animals because we love them and that if they go extinct， we will only be spiritually poorer rather than ecologically poorer。 He neglects to mention that ecological services provided by the species we lose cannot be replaced easily。 He claims that invasive species are fine and that they do not out-compete native species for resources。 He believes that infinite growth is a good thing。 This book is based in fact if those facts aren't fleshed out or if the other side is made to seem completely out of their depth。 。。。more

Kent Burnett ，

An important book （listened to audio book）

Greg Watson ，

In Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All， Michael Shellenberger makes a generally convincing case against alarmism on several environmental issues。 Perhaps the most emphasized argument of the book is nuclear power as the cleanest and least expensive form of energy instead of solar and wind power。 These （as Shellenberger demonstrates） are unreliable， expensive， and environmentally unfriendly。 In 1953， U。S。 President Eisenhower addressed the UN General Assembly， delivering what In Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All， Michael Shellenberger makes a generally convincing case against alarmism on several environmental issues。 Perhaps the most emphasized argument of the book is nuclear power as the cleanest and least expensive form of energy instead of solar and wind power。 These （as Shellenberger demonstrates） are unreliable， expensive， and environmentally unfriendly。 In 1953， U。S。 President Eisenhower addressed the UN General Assembly， delivering what would become known as "The Atoms for Peace" speech。 In the speech， Eisenhower argued for the creation of an international atomic energy agency。 He outlined the primary purpose of the agency as follows:"The more important responsibility of this atomic energy agency would be to devise methods whereby this fissionable material would be allocated to serve the peaceful pursuits of mankind。 Experts would be mobilized to apply atomic energy to the needs of agriculture， medicine and other peaceful activities。 A special purpose would be to provide abundant electrical energy in the power-starved areas of the world。"The international response to Eisenhower's speech was favorable。 "But the atomic hope wouldn't last。 Within ten years， the war on nuclear power would begin。" Anti-nuclear power advocates "tapped into significant anxieties over nuclear weapons among baby boomers" in the States。 By the 1970s， several major environmental organizations in the States "focused on stopping the construction of nuclear power plants。"Hollywood contributed its opposition to nuclear power with the 1979 film The China Syndrome。 The film claimed that a nuclear power plant accident "could render an area the size of the state of Pennsylvania permanently uninhabitable。" The film's release coincided with the nuclear power plant accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania。 As opposition to nuclear power increased in the States， the nuclear scientific community became insular。 The result was that public arguments against nuclear power went largely unanswered。 Despite the opposition to nuclear power， Shellenberger sees reasons for optimism。 To that end， in 2017， he established the pro-nuclear environmental organization Environmental Progress。 And he bravely established a storefront for the organization in Berkeley， California。 As mentioned， the book deals with several environmental issues。 For this review， I focused on nuclear power。 There is much more to the book， though。 Reading it is well worth the effort。 。。。more

Juan Carlos ，

A fantastic book to confront environment hysteria with facts。

Sandy ，

Eye-opening！ I respect science greatly， but can certainly see how we all get carried away and swept up in environmental alarmism at times， it's all the rage after all！ This book provides a series of sobering and well-researched perspectives that suggests humanity's outlook is not so sombre。 Eye-opening！ I respect science greatly， but can certainly see how we all get carried away and swept up in environmental alarmism at times， it's all the rage after all！ This book provides a series of sobering and well-researched perspectives that suggests humanity's outlook is not so sombre。 。。。more

John Devlin ，

Shellenberger takes a jackhammer to the edifice of modern environmentalism。As a former priest of the environment， the author speaks with the power of Martin Luther assaulting the ramparts of Catholicism。However， unlike religious pedantry， shellenberger has facts to back up his assertions。Technology is goodNuclear power is carbon free and safeEnvironmentalists have a fetish over a Thoreau like vision of walking hand in hand with nature。Environmentalists have been taking payoffs from big oil for d Shellenberger takes a jackhammer to the edifice of modern environmentalism。As a former priest of the environment， the author speaks with the power of Martin Luther assaulting the ramparts of Catholicism。However， unlike religious pedantry， shellenberger has facts to back up his assertions。Technology is goodNuclear power is carbon free and safeEnvironmentalists have a fetish over a Thoreau like vision of walking hand in hand with nature。Environmentalists have been taking payoffs from big oil for decades to Block the threat of nuclear。Solar and wind are fundamentally less dense and thus unable to furnish energy to power modern societies。And much more。。 。。。more

Dski ，

I recommend despite only 3 stars。 It was a little dry and I personally expected more global studies。 However， there was a fair amount of research， and sadly exposed how some elitists use their money and fame as a platform to distort information to fit their own truths。

Dorn Permenter ，

Disappointing。 I had to quit a quarter of the way in。 Mr Shellenberger's premise seemed to be "if you keep hitting the panic button every other minute， people will become desensitized to the alarm。 Here's how we actually fix the problem。" Instead， it was just one overly simplified dismissal after another。 I enjoyed his story telling ability which is why I think people are willing to jump on board with his confirmation bias approach to "common sense" solutions。Are plastic straws the entire proble Disappointing。 I had to quit a quarter of the way in。 Mr Shellenberger's premise seemed to be "if you keep hitting the panic button every other minute， people will become desensitized to the alarm。 Here's how we actually fix the problem。" Instead， it was just one overly simplified dismissal after another。 I enjoyed his story telling ability which is why I think people are willing to jump on board with his confirmation bias approach to "common sense" solutions。Are plastic straws the entire problem？ No。 Does he acknowledge single use plastics are everywhere？ Yes。 His solution？ Sunlight degrades styrofoam sooner than 1000 years， besides plastics prevent elephant and turtle poaching。 What？Is it hypocritical of nations with historically bad environmental policy to smack talk other countries with bad environmental policies？ Yes。 Should that end the discussion？ According to him， yes， because the rainforest doesn't actually provide as much oxygen as we were told 50 years ago。 Penguins are starving due to over fishing。 "Oh my， I ate their food today。 I'm the villian。" This is when I had to stop。 It's just petty sarcasm。 He did occasionally lob new ideas out but ultimately just to distract from whoever he was attacking at the moment。 This could have been a book about what we can do and not sound like we're crying wolf。 Instead it's a book that placates climate change deniers into not needing to act upon anything because it's not as bad as the alarmists make it。 Alarmists want people to actively help save the environment。 Shellenberger is just like a mocking child， he points at the alarmist making the crazy sign so people feel validated in their inaction。 。。。more

Corey Gerein ，

Michael Shellenberger starts off each chapter by steel-manning the argument for each given environmental policy or common held believe regarding climate change， then he spends the rest of the chapter thoroughly dismantling that claim using scientific studies， past failures， logic， and common sense。 It's not a book about denying climate change but a book about recognizing what's true， what's hysteria， and what's the best way to move forward。 Michael Shellenberger starts off each chapter by steel-manning the argument for each given environmental policy or common held believe regarding climate change， then he spends the rest of the chapter thoroughly dismantling that claim using scientific studies， past failures， logic， and common sense。 It's not a book about denying climate change but a book about recognizing what's true， what's hysteria， and what's the best way to move forward。 。。。more

Terri Palermo ，

I can be so easily convinced about almost anything if the speaker/writer is articulate and Mr。 Shellenberger is indeed very intelligent， an excellent writer and quite convincing。 To me， though， this is such a highly charged political topic that I need to be careful。 It's difficult to explain， but I know how I am and， for now， it's time to put this aside and I will revisit it in the future。 I can be so easily convinced about almost anything if the speaker/writer is articulate and Mr。 Shellenberger is indeed very intelligent， an excellent writer and quite convincing。 To me， though， this is such a highly charged political topic that I need to be careful。 It's difficult to explain， but I know how I am and， for now， it's time to put this aside and I will revisit it in the future。 。。。more

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0