Global Warming

"Opposing Viewpoints Series -- Global Warming" may be difficult reading but it is worth the effort! However, the book already needs an update on the latest developments in the debate! This book is where I started to read up on "Global Warming". It presents the data available, as of the end of 2005 (approx.) in a fair way and presents all the various views of the data, with excellent references. A summary would sound something like this: "Our world is showing some signs of warming temperatures. This warming seems to be, mostly, from man's activities. However, both of these points are debatable and the argument is not settled (as of 2006). The science presented is fairly good but in the time since publication, new evidence is pointing in new directions. Also, the old evidence had some problems. One of those problems was using different measurment technologies without acknowledging the differences properly. I have no idea why, in all parts of 'science', some folks keep claiming that we "know" more than is possible to know, but they do. I think the book should be for adults only, with, at the least, a little bit of science training. At first, science looks straightforward. However, anyone who has actually done scientific research can tell you that "objective" and acurate measurements and observations are not simple and extrapolation of the data into the future is always a questionable process. In this debate, the scientists have reached the stage of "not so simple". Read the book. It is a good book! But, be sure to read a bunch of more reacent material. Do not decide anything until you have seen the material available on all sides of this debate.

The unspoken premise of the book, that there are only two sides to the global warming issue, tends to oversimplify the issue. But for pete's sake, it really is a good idea to have a vigorous discussion, oversimplified or not. The book absorbs easily, and is short in length. Mostly the articles ("Viewpoints") are arranged with very opposing positions set back-to-back, and this certainly will get you thinking. Keep in mind that the publication date is 2006, therefore much more has been learned about this topic in the last 1-1/2 years. Much of the argumentation will sound very black-and-white as you read. Two of the articles sound like just plain arguing, though, and might be bypassed with little loss: Viewpoints number 3 and number 4 of chapter 2, which squabble about SUVs being evil vs. fine. All the rest of the articles are worth the time. Especially interesting are Viewpoints number 5 and number 6 of chapter 2, which are NOT opposing thoughts, but rather opine that the sun or the Earth's core radiation are the cause of the current climate warming (respectively). Then check out an article by none other than Senator John McCain! In Viewpoint number 4 of chapter 3, the good senator strongly proposes safe nuclear energy as an excellent solution to a warming climate. This, way ahead of his announced presidential run. After polishing off this very readable book, please do at least glance through the "Further Discussion," pp 192-3. Your English and social studies teachers will be very proud!

to actually be able to decipher what is true in them, you need to already have read several books (in which case, why are you now reading this book?). This doesn't mean this book is bad -- it's not. It stays out of the argument and only provides the argument, doing it's best to be unbiased. In doing so, it inevitably created a book where the contributors contradict eachother since there is no real referee. If there was a referee, this book would not be unbiased. Okay, with that in mind, I see three types of people who may be interested in reading this book. Type I: I'm uncertain about the debate and looking for knowledge. I may have some background, but I cannot tell what is fact and what is not yet when arguments on the topic arise. Type II: I'm looking for opposing viewpoints for research, but not to find out "truth" (for example, a school research project). Type III: I've read a lot of information about global warming already and I'm mostly aware of the issues for and against. I understand to a pretty good degree how the debate has developed in the last few years, both scientifically and politically. To Types I & II: This book cannot (should not) stand alone in your research, but it is a good starting point. If it does stand alone, then you'll be even more confused about what is legitimate and what isn't than when you started -- if you do this, you will know the arguments but cannot say what is fact and what isn't. Look carefully at arguments/motives. To give this topic a fair reading, you will need to commit a good amount of time to other research. You will also need to take the approach of Type III after you get a good information base. (You could actually skip to the Type III approach immediately, but then you cannot stand up to arguments once you've made up your mind.) To Type III: You may benefit by instead looking for answers to your specific questions and analysing the people behind the arguments rather than reading this book, which will afford nothing significantly new or profound insight into what is true. Do research by looking especially for people who work against their own interest and see what side they've come out on. (If a solar company executive says global warming is a fluke, you should probably take their opinion carefully since they are working against their interest. Likewise, if an oil company executive says global warming is real, then that lends them strong credibility since they are acting against their financial interest.) If you complete this type III approach and have a good knowledge base, I think you'll come out on the "correct side" (from my point of view). If you complete "Type III" and also read the book, you will probably spot some false claims and be wishing you could let everyone who reads this book know about them (but you cannot without sounding biased, which is why I refuse to say which side I'm on... :) ). I know I cannot really justify my disappointed about this book (I'm disappointed that it d