The New Climate War: the fight to take back our planet
- Downloads：6393
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-04-07 09:51:57
- Update Date：2025-09-07
- Status：finish
- Author：Michael E. Mann
- ISBN：1913348687
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
A world-leading expert exposes how fossil-fuel companies have waged a thirty-year campaign to blame individuals for climate change while taking no responsibility themselves， and offers guidance on what we must do now to reverse global warming。
Recycle。 Fly less。 Eat less meat。 These are some of the ways that we’ve been told we can save the planet。 But are individuals really to blame for the climate crisis？
Seventy-one per cent of global emissions come from the same 100 companies。 Companies that have spent the last 30 years using clever marketing techniques to place the responsibility for reversing climate change on individuals， whose actions — however well meaning — simply won’t be enough alone。 The result has been disastrous for our planet。
In The New Climate War， renowned scientist Michael E。 Mann argues that all is not lost。 He draws the battle lines between the people and the polluters — fossil-fuel companies， right-wing plutocrats， and petro-states — and outlines a plan for forcing our governments and corporations to wake up and make real change。
Recycle。 Fly less。 Eat less meat。 These are some of the ways that we’ve been told we can save the planet。 But are individuals really to blame for the climate crisis？
Seventy-one per cent of global emissions come from the same 100 companies。 Companies that have spent the last 30 years using clever marketing techniques to place the responsibility for reversing climate change on individuals， whose actions — however well meaning — simply won’t be enough alone。 The result has been disastrous for our planet。
In The New Climate War， renowned scientist Michael E。 Mann argues that all is not lost。 He draws the battle lines between the people and the polluters — fossil-fuel companies， right-wing plutocrats， and petro-states — and outlines a plan for forcing our governments and corporations to wake up and make real change。
Reviews
Marcelo Ardon
，
I really enjoyed this book。 However I do wish there was less Twitter conversation recaps。
Jim Witkins
，
3。5 - useful overview of the tactics being used by fossil fuel interests and their political allies to divide us and delay climate action。 （The in-activists） Offers big picture， science based， political reforms to tackle the climate challenge and remake a healthier， more just world。
Paul
，
I found this a constant mix of enlightening discussion and frustrating waffle。 There is much to take away in arguments for particular policy solutions to climate change。 However， it also reads as super-defensive， needlessly antagonistic， and at times condescending and hypocritical。 Mann has no time for people who disagree with him on any point， particularly if they are at all on the left of the political spectrum。 If you agree with anybody who disagrees with him， e。g。 you see a link between clim I found this a constant mix of enlightening discussion and frustrating waffle。 There is much to take away in arguments for particular policy solutions to climate change。 However， it also reads as super-defensive， needlessly antagonistic， and at times condescending and hypocritical。 Mann has no time for people who disagree with him on any point， particularly if they are at all on the left of the political spectrum。 If you agree with anybody who disagrees with him， e。g。 you see a link between climate justice and social justice， you are either a shill for fossil fuels， a Russian bot， or as a last resort you could be a well meaning idiot。It’s also strange to read of the danger of identity politics （not at all defined） and outrage that somebody could accuse him of mansplaining。。。 shortly followed by an accusation of mansplaining of others who disagree with him。 Now the accusation may be true in both， one or neither of these cases， but without any contextualisation， it reads as hypocritical。Having said all that， I did get a lot from the discussion and get some good nuggets of info from a climate expert。 I’m definitely going to have to read a book from one of those pesky people who want social justice with their climate justice though to get the other side of the argument。 。。。more
Kerry
，
Interesting insight into the state of the climate change "debate"。 This was written by an American climate scientist and it was very disturbing， but not surprising， how often Australia and particularly The Australian newspaper， featured at the centre of climate denialism and misinformation。 Another reminder that the Murdoch media is the greatest threat to science and democracy world wide。 This was an interesting and well researched text with lots of up to date information and happenings on this Interesting insight into the state of the climate change "debate"。 This was written by an American climate scientist and it was very disturbing， but not surprising， how often Australia and particularly The Australian newspaper， featured at the centre of climate denialism and misinformation。 Another reminder that the Murdoch media is the greatest threat to science and democracy world wide。 This was an interesting and well researched text with lots of up to date information and happenings on this vital issue。 Worth a look。 。。。more
Tomasz Onyszko
，
Maybe I picked this one with wrong expectations thus three stars。 The book delivers its message however there is a lot of examples and discussions about specific people or even tweet exchanges to prove a point - it does prove a point but there is too much of it vs the actual message。 The references to specific documents， articles， people and discussion who said what makes it hard （for me） to go through first 30% of a book。 Author delivers a good overview of tactics and narratives which are targe Maybe I picked this one with wrong expectations thus three stars。 The book delivers its message however there is a lot of examples and discussions about specific people or even tweet exchanges to prove a point - it does prove a point but there is too much of it vs the actual message。 The references to specific documents， articles， people and discussion who said what makes it hard （for me） to go through first 30% of a book。 Author delivers a good overview of tactics and narratives which are targeted to divert attention by the industry from the problem or to switch the narrative to put the burden of the cost of change on the ordinary people。 Among it， it also discuss the current status of the efforts around replacing the fossil fuels and what might be done in this area。 I would gladly see replacing the references to discussions， people and tweets with more ideas and data around the problem， but that might be why I picked it up with a wrong expectations :） 。。。more
Brownguy
，
Excellently researched， honest， and hopeful。 This book has been inspiring。
RRinDC
，
Mann is a notable climatologist and geophysicist at Pennsylvania State University who has been long involved in climate issues， and is convinced that public policy--government action--is essential to address the problem。 I expected to find the the history of climate change research， data on climate change， and policy recommendations。 Instead， the book identifies the actors and funding sources for the information war surrounding the issue。 This media war frames the public understanding of climate Mann is a notable climatologist and geophysicist at Pennsylvania State University who has been long involved in climate issues， and is convinced that public policy--government action--is essential to address the problem。 I expected to find the the history of climate change research， data on climate change， and policy recommendations。 Instead， the book identifies the actors and funding sources for the information war surrounding the issue。 This media war frames the public understanding of climate change。 Mann identifies and refutes the arguments of climate change deniers。 He outlines the disinformation campaign waged by the fossil fuel industry to confuse the debate and slow the pace of change， listing their tactics as deceit， division， deflecting responsibility away from industry to individuals， delaying policy action， and promoting despair and defeatism。 Anyone who's read about litigation surrounding tobacco and cancer， or civil or women's rights will recognize these as the same tactics used to oppose change to address these issues。 It's an interesting book and an easy read， but desperately needs a good editor。 Much of what he said could have been said more concisely。 。。。more
Marion
，
I expected a different book， but am genuinely glad I read it。 It details the politics， actors and debates about climate-change and is not about climate-science per se。 This could have been a difficult "meta-read"， but was not。 It is a useful book。 Though I'm not sure I land on the same conclusions as Mann in every single question， his warnings about pitfalls in climate-debates are important。 The book is useful as a road-map when parsing through-， or responding to arguments。 Do NOT heed the inact I expected a different book， but am genuinely glad I read it。 It details the politics， actors and debates about climate-change and is not about climate-science per se。 This could have been a difficult "meta-read"， but was not。 It is a useful book。 Though I'm not sure I land on the same conclusions as Mann in every single question， his warnings about pitfalls in climate-debates are important。 The book is useful as a road-map when parsing through-， or responding to arguments。 Do NOT heed the inactivists。Recommended reading。 （When lifting the issue of nuclear power I am decidedly in the "Mann-camp"， not with Gates。 Bonus points :））。 。。。more
Ron Piovesan
，
I really wanted to like this book more。 There is a strong message here about the importance of confronting climate denialism and doomism， and Michael Mann is clearly on the forefront of responsible， fact based discussion on how to tackle the climate emergency。 But the book is repetitive and spends too much time outlining social media wars between all manner of climate commentators。 The core message of the book is important and needs to be heard， I just wish the writing and the substance of the b I really wanted to like this book more。 There is a strong message here about the importance of confronting climate denialism and doomism， and Michael Mann is clearly on the forefront of responsible， fact based discussion on how to tackle the climate emergency。 But the book is repetitive and spends too much time outlining social media wars between all manner of climate commentators。 The core message of the book is important and needs to be heard， I just wish the writing and the substance of the book itself was better presented。 。。。more
Michael O'Hara
，
A very clear and cogent account of the battles between the people and organizations arguing for action on climate change and those forces working for denial， delay and diversion written by a person who has been on the front lines of this war for a long time。 The reader will learn much about how and why this conflict was created， the personalities involved and the techniques used。 I recommend the book to anyone who has taken this problem seriously and wants to help our species deal with it。
Adam
，
Although the author is a scientist， this book is mainly an overview of the politics of climate change， with a focus on the tactics employed by those who oppose the large scale action needed to address the crisis， and how to take them on。
Mike
，
If you want to be serious about actually helping the planet read this book！ Follow Michael E。 Mann on twitter @MichaelEMann Make use of some of his favorite resources like skepticalscience。com@CliimateNexus，@TheDailyClimate@InsideClimate@GuardianEcoOther resources that I like:https://www。desmogblog。comhttps://www。realclimate。orghttp://theconsensusproject。com If you want to be serious about actually helping the planet read this book！ Follow Michael E。 Mann on twitter @MichaelEMann Make use of some of his favorite resources like skepticalscience。com@CliimateNexus，@TheDailyClimate@InsideClimate@GuardianEcoOther resources that I like:https://www。desmogblog。comhttps://www。realclimate。orghttp://theconsensusproject。com 。。。more
Carrie Jensen
，
I love the message - hopeful and pragmatic！ That being said， I feel like the second half of the book rambled on a bit too long and went on and on about particular tweets， which while they may have been relevant to the argument， they also got to be a bit tedious。 I think this could have been edited down a bit， but overall the message was a good one。
Grant
，
I’m glad Michael has spent a good portion of this book covering the problem of nihilism and the doomer mentality although it’s drawing a long bow to call Assange a strong part of Russian propaganda and some of the political tales are a little off。 Overall this book is still very much vital to read。
Anita
，
This is a brilliant and extremely useful critique and expose of the language and constructs used by those that are opposed to fighting the war to take back the planet。 This book exposes the methods used by climate change deniers ie disinformation， deception， deflection， downplays， and doomsayers。 Mann believes that with the current unprecedented extreme weather plus the obvious impact of a worldwide epidemic， together with the collapse of climate change denial arguments that we are in a moment w This is a brilliant and extremely useful critique and expose of the language and constructs used by those that are opposed to fighting the war to take back the planet。 This book exposes the methods used by climate change deniers ie disinformation， deception， deflection， downplays， and doomsayers。 Mann believes that with the current unprecedented extreme weather plus the obvious impact of a worldwide epidemic， together with the collapse of climate change denial arguments that we are in a moment where we have an unprecedented opportunity to change the course of human history。 。。。more
Hanno
，
I really enjoyed the book。 It offers many good talking points and provides a much needed reality check。 I would have preferred more scientific facts and fewer twitter quotes。
Matthew
，
Quite simply one of the best books I've read about climate change -- far from the usual hodgepodge of doom， gloom， and statistics it's an easy to read， systematic look at the problem and what needs to be done。 As the longtime climate scientist points out， we have all the tools we need to succeed -- we often just lack the political will to implement them。 But even that's changing， as he warns of the danger of climate deniers is passing but a new danger is emerging the "climate doomers" those who Quite simply one of the best books I've read about climate change -- far from the usual hodgepodge of doom， gloom， and statistics it's an easy to read， systematic look at the problem and what needs to be done。 As the longtime climate scientist points out， we have all the tools we need to succeed -- we often just lack the political will to implement them。 But even that's changing， as he warns of the danger of climate deniers is passing but a new danger is emerging the "climate doomers" those who argue that problem has become so intractable that there's no reason to do anything。 Part of his dangerous D's: disinformation， deceit， divisiveness， deflection， delay， despair-mongering， and doomism。 He also warns of the danger of well meaning groups with laudable aims attempting to bootstrap their hope for systemic change onto climate legislation as in certain aspects of the Green New Deal。 Highly recommend！！！ 。。。more
Archy O
，
Too many tweets and not enough structure The first portion of this book does an excellent job summarizing the history of the environmental movement and drawing parallels between the fossil fuel lobby and other malevolent corporations。 The second half， however， is rather rambling。 There’s far too many verbatim quotes of Tweets that the author thinks are interesting， and a few recurring authorial tics （« if this sounds like。。。。 that's because it is。。。 »） which detract from the force of the argumen Too many tweets and not enough structure The first portion of this book does an excellent job summarizing the history of the environmental movement and drawing parallels between the fossil fuel lobby and other malevolent corporations。 The second half， however， is rather rambling。 There’s far too many verbatim quotes of Tweets that the author thinks are interesting， and a few recurring authorial tics （« if this sounds like。。。。 that's because it is。。。 »） which detract from the force of the argument。 The author rather crudely transitions from a chapter on why environmentalists ought to stick together and not split hairs to a chapter on why he vehemently disagrees with several fairly mainstream ideas in energy and climate science （carbon capture， nuclear power）。 I was hoping for a more deft handling of this tension between an inclusive and decisive climate movement。 。。。more
Wouter
，
Zet vooral in op verschillen in klimaatbeweging en te weinig op de collectieve actie die nodig is。
John S Sadowsky
，
Disappointing - Gates' book is much better。Michael Mann has certainly been at the center of past climate wars。 I soundly agree with his thesis that denialism is largely dead （although it stubbornly persists with far too much of the Republican base and right-wing media） and has been replaced by "inactivism。" I agree with much of what he has written。 However， none of this is news。 This is just a political rant。 Unfortunately， Mann doesn't give us much about how to actually achieve the zero-carbon Disappointing - Gates' book is much better。Michael Mann has certainly been at the center of past climate wars。 I soundly agree with his thesis that denialism is largely dead （although it stubbornly persists with far too much of the Republican base and right-wing media） and has been replaced by "inactivism。" I agree with much of what he has written。 However， none of this is news。 This is just a political rant。 Unfortunately， Mann doesn't give us much about how to actually achieve the zero-carbon goal。 OK， the political rant has its place， but people who are actually interested in solutions should look elsewhere。After reading Mann's book， some friends asked me what I thought of Bill Gates' recent book "How to Avoid a Climate Disaster。" I initially regurgitated what Mann had written， mostly unflattering， about Gates。 In one sentence in a section entitled "Let Them Burn Coal，" Mann equates Bill Gates with Rex Tillerson。 In a wildly audacious statement， Mann writes "It's the tendency for members of a particular， privileged demographic group （primarily middle-aged， almost exclusively white men） to think they can just swoop in， surf the Internet， interview a few hand-selected "experts，" and solve the great problems that others have spent decades unable to crack。 It is almost inevitable that the product， in the end， is a hot mess， consisting of fatally bad takes and misguided framing couched in deeply condescending mansplaining。 On climate change， we've seen it with Bill Gates， Nate Silver， and Michael Moore。" I suspect Moore deserves this。 I don't know about Silver's positions。 Having read Gates' book， I can say unambiguously that this does not even remotely describe Mr。 Gates。 （And， hey， I'm a hardcore Mac guy！）And what good does this do？ Both Mann and Gates agree on immediate urgency。 We need to electrify transportation and manufacturing as much as quickly as possible。 We need to decarbonize are rebuild a smart electric grid。 Both strongly agree that renewables （wind， solar， geothermal & hydro） are cost-effective and will get us a long way down the road to a zero-carbon future （which should be obvious to anybody paying attention）。 But are renewables enough？ Mann has little to offer on this important question。 Gates gives us a sober sector-by-sector assessment。Take Carbon Capture （CC）， for example， often panned because of its association with "Clean Coal" （the all-time winner in the oxymoron category）。 Of course， CC is a stupid idea for resurrecting coal。 It doesn't make coal clean， and renewables are cheaper！ However， as Gates points out， we don't have any zero-carbon solutions to manufacture cement， steel， and other materials， so CC will likely have an important role in manufacturing。 How does Mann expect to build that new smart-grid infrastructure without a LOT of carbon-intensive steel and concrete？ - He doesn't say。The Gates book is full of technical details and facts， and he is investing his billions in solutions。 Gates prioritizes solutions by calculating their green premium - the percentage cost increase for a zero-carbon alternative to business-as-usual fossil fuel。 That is extremely important to understand。 Today， solar and wind have a near-zero green premium， so yes - deploy， deploy， deploy！ But roughly half the transportation sector will be difficult or impossible to electrified （large trucks， ships， and planes）。 That requires zero-carbon liquid fuels， which currently have a huge green premium。 Gates rightly tells us we need to expand our R&D efforts to bring down those premiums down to the point that they are economically deployable on a global scale。 That's how we priorities climate actions！ That's smart investing。Is that what Mann means by a "hot mess， consisting of fatally bad takes and misguided framing couched in deeply condescending mansplaining"？ Really？ So， the climate scientists lecture the businessman on investing。 Just who is doing the mansplaining here？ 。。。more
Matt Heavner
，
Great and important。 If you are already "elbow deep" in Climate （science and/or policy） this is a well organized status update。 If you aren't "elbow deep" （why not！？！） this is a great intro/overview。 Great and important。 If you are already "elbow deep" in Climate （science and/or policy） this is a well organized status update。 If you aren't "elbow deep" （why not！？！） this is a great intro/overview。 。。。more
Lynsey Sharp
，
Mann discusses climate change denialism， deflection， and doomism， outlining how all of these ideas and their accompanying rhetoric are hindering our ability to take concrete action and make broad changes （meaning not just on an individual level， but at a societal level） that will help prevent further damage to our environment。
Debjeet
，
I wish this book could have been more solution oriented。 There are lots of rhetoric in book which is simply avoidable。
Kurtis
，
C-L-I-M-A-T-E who's the best from earth to sea？ it's Climate （clap clap） It's Climate （clap clap） C-L-I-M-A-T-E who's the best from earth to sea？ it's Climate （clap clap） It's Climate （clap clap） 。。。more
John Lawson
，
Excellent hard-hitting book looking at how fossil fuel interests have used many strategies to stop tackling the climate crisis。 Gave me energy by giving a clear sense of the opposition and it's methods。 Excellent hard-hitting book looking at how fossil fuel interests have used many strategies to stop tackling the climate crisis。 Gave me energy by giving a clear sense of the opposition and it's methods。 。。。more
Erik
，
Enough science to understand the problem and see that the solution is eminently doable。 But it's really about politics， how the fossil fuel industry and its paid lackeys are blocking climate action， but in a new way。 The old climate war was straight up science denial。 Since that won't fly anymore， the industry has retreated to its fall-back position: acknowledging that climate change is real but finding ways to defer action by deflecting responsibility on consumers or dividing the movement again Enough science to understand the problem and see that the solution is eminently doable。 But it's really about politics， how the fossil fuel industry and its paid lackeys are blocking climate action， but in a new way。 The old climate war was straight up science denial。 Since that won't fly anymore， the industry has retreated to its fall-back position: acknowledging that climate change is real but finding ways to defer action by deflecting responsibility on consumers or dividing the movement against itself， like vegans vs meat eaters。 。。。more
Ben Rogers
，
Great book on climate change。 It had some great environmental points。 Some crazy things are going on lately in the world with climate change。 We need to act now！3。9/5
Todd Martin
，
When it comes to the war on the science – that is， the old climate war – the forces of denial have all but conceded defeat。 But the new climate war – the war on action – is still actively being waged。-tMichael E。 Mann， The New Climate WarProfessor Michael E。 Mann （co-author of the well-known “hockey-stick graph” depicting a sharp rise in global temperatures since the industrial revolution） has been serving on the front lines of the battle against climate change disinformation after having been a When it comes to the war on the science – that is， the old climate war – the forces of denial have all but conceded defeat。 But the new climate war – the war on action – is still actively being waged。-tMichael E。 Mann， The New Climate WarProfessor Michael E。 Mann （co-author of the well-known “hockey-stick graph” depicting a sharp rise in global temperatures since the industrial revolution） has been serving on the front lines of the battle against climate change disinformation after having been accused of academic malfeasance for purportedly falsifying climate data （he did not， and multiple investigations have re-confirmed both the integrity of his work and the hockey-stick graph）。 Rather than take these accusations lying down， Mann has chosen to fight back and has become a prominent voice in the fight to combat climate change。 In The New Climate War Mann debunks a number of arguments put forth by those he dubs ‘inactivists’， whose goal is to shift blame away from fossil fuel companies in an effort to stave off governmental regulation。 While there is much that members of the public can do to reduce their individual carbon footprint， Mann is correct to note that voluntary personal action has never once solved a global problem， let alone one of the magnitude of global warming。 He rightly asserts that regulation of the fossil fuel industry is an essential part of the climate solution。 The other strategies Mann proposes are largely what you’d expect。 He urges world governments to:-tAdopt a carbon tax-tEnact a carbon cap and trade system-tReplace fossil fuels with green energy While I hold Professor Mann in the highest regard， with this latest book I feel like he has drifted away from his role as a science communicator and problem solver， taking up a new mantel as a political ideologue with an axe to grind。 That is rather a shame because the world is already replete with those quick to petty putdowns and we desperately need clear-eyed pragmatists who are able to communicate the tough decisions we face as a species if we are to solve this pressing and difficult problem。 Instead， Mann uses the book to lash out at his perceived enemies while demanding that only certain climate solutions be considered， denigrating approaches that don’t meet his test of ideological purity。 This is reminiscent of the approach taken by the pro-life crowd who oppose strategies that reduce unwanted pregnancies such as contraception and sex education to instead focus exclusively on criminalizing abortion。 When it comes to these fundamentalists， only ideological pure solutions are acceptable。 In a similar vein Mann defends the burning of wood waste as an energy solution despite the fact that there aren’t enough trees to meet global energy demand， but disparages carbon sequestration and the planting of trees because they are insufficient in and of themselves to offset all carbon emissions produced worldwide。 Why he holds these tactics to wildly different standards isn’t explained。 More egregiously， he dedicates only a single paragraph to the discussion of the role of population in the climate crisis， only doing so to accuse anyone who would suggest that the number of humans on the planet be reduced as ‘racist’。It pains me as a progressive to admit it， but leftists are far too cavalier in tossing around the ‘racism’ charge。 It’s a strategy used by those who want to shut down discussion of any issue with which they disagree。 Given Mann provides no evidence in support of this accusation， there’s every reason to assume he’s doing the same here。 So why is a reducing the birth rate racist？ According to Mann “people in the developing world， where the main population growth is taking place， have a tiny carbon footprint in comparison with those in the industrial world。” I’ve encountered this argument before and frankly find it baffling。 First， I’m not aware of anyone who has proposed that family planning measures be limited to ‘developing countries’。 In fact， as Mann himself alludes， a reduction of the population of those living in industrialized nations would indeed have a proportionally greater benefit。 Second， when it comes to developing countries， it’s important to point out that there are few strategies that do more to empower women （particularly in locals with a history of misogyny） than providing them with reproductive control of their own bodies。 If anything， it strikes me that a more plausible accusation of ‘racism’ could be directed towards those who seek to deny women in these areas access to contraception， but I’m not one to throw about this term as carelessly as Mann himself is wont to do。 Mann goes on to say that: “The problem isn’t so much ‘too many people’ as it is ‘too many people who burn a lot of carbon’。” Wait … what？！？ If the problem is ‘too many people who burn a lot of carbon’ wouldn’t the problem be improved by … and I’m just spit-balling here … fewer people？ Here’s the thing … the magnitude of the climate crisis is so large and the timeframes to take meaningful action so short， that no effective options should be off the table。 This is， of course， why most reputable climate activists encourage an ‘all of the above’ approach to the issue， because no silver bullet exists。 Yes， we should absolutely pursue the measures that Mann recommends， but there are good reasons to believe they aren’t sufficient。 Take a look at the following chart， which depicts global greenhouse gas emissions over time and ask yourself … how good a job is green energy doing in reducing CO2？（Source = Center for Climate and Energy Solutions）More green energy is produced today than ever before， yet greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise。 This trend expected to continue for decades to come due to population growth and increased energy use per capita。 Quite simply， more needs to be done and this should include efforts to reduce the size of the human population to a sustainable level。 There are nearly 8 billion people on the planet today and that number is expected to increase to 11 billion by the end of the century。 More crucially … every single one of these individuals yearns to live a highly consumptive western lifestyle。 It would take 5 Earths to support the current human population if everyone's consumption patterns rivaled those of us in the U。S。 At the risk of stating the obvious … just the one exists。 Global warming can result in species extinction， destabilization of ecosystems， resource depletion and population displacement， it exacerbates regional conflict and can contribute to political instability … but do you know what？ While differing in the specifics， overpopulation has the potential to produce each of these disastrous outcomes as well。 Solving global warming is a necessary condition for species （including our own） to thrive， but it is not one that is sufficient。 Even if the climate crisis is resolved in its entirety， we could still wind up facing a planet-wide collapse of critical ecosystems should our species exceed the carrying capacity of the globe。 I will also point out that a significant reduction in the human population not only benefits the climate but has the potential to improve EVERY OTHER environmental problem as well。 To be clear， no one supports draconian or involuntary measures such as China’s ‘one child’ policy。 Instead， experts suggest that universal access to birth control， tax incentives， and education and empowerment of women are the most effective means to reduce birthrates。 These could be coupled with social engineering techniques designed to overcome the cultural stigma of women who are told from an early age that they can’t live happy and fulfilling lives without children and that promote the freedom， satisfaction and financial benefits that a child-free lifestyle can bring。Only an ideologue with fundamentalistic tendencies would so cavalierly dismiss potential solutions when the stakes are so high。 The fact that Mann does so with no intellectual justification beyond puerile invective is not only disappointing but will cause many to disregard his otherwise important message。 。。。more
William Nist
，
The noted Climate Scientist from Penn State， Michael Mann， gives a surprisingly optimistic assessment of our chances of addressing the climate crisis that has become ever more serious over the past 2 decades。 While a lot of this book is a chronicle of the public attacks he has experienced and a defense thereof， the observation that we may be at a 'tipping point' in climate awareness is the main takeaway of this work。Mann spends a lot of time addressing the doom and gloom that many （I must confes The noted Climate Scientist from Penn State， Michael Mann， gives a surprisingly optimistic assessment of our chances of addressing the climate crisis that has become ever more serious over the past 2 decades。 While a lot of this book is a chronicle of the public attacks he has experienced and a defense thereof， the observation that we may be at a 'tipping point' in climate awareness is the main takeaway of this work。Mann spends a lot of time addressing the doom and gloom that many （I must confess， even myself） feel as we gaze on the political stagnation around this issue; but he argues that this gloom is misplaced and that public opinion has indeed come around to the need for climate action。 I hope so。 He warns that this defeatist attitude can be a self fulfilling prophecy！ His prescription for change must include not only personal change in old habits （which is what the fossil fuel industries conveniently want us to do--thus deflecting the responsibility away from them）， but systemic change in our primary sources of energy。 Both a vital to any solution。 This is a level headed work， and worthy of your time。 It will keep you on stable ground when looking outside makes you feel like you are on a climate roller coaster headed for disaster。 。。。more
Daniel H Raess
，