What do you think?
Rate this book
The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines
The ongoing assault on climate science in the United States has never been more aggressive, more blatant, or more widely publicized than in the case of the Hockey Stick graph -- a clear and compelling visual presentation of scientific data, put together by MichaelE. Mann and his colleagues, demonstrating that global temperatures have risen in conjunction with the increase in industrialization and the use of fossil fuels. Here was an easy-to-understand graph that, in a glance, posed a threat to major corporate energy interests and those who do their political bidding. The stakes were simply too high to ignore the Hockey Stick -- and so began a relentless attack on a body of science and on the investigators whose work formed its scientific basis.
The Hockey Stick achieved prominence in a 2001 UN report on climate change and quickly became a central icon in the "climate wars." The real issue has never been the graph's data but rather its implied threat to those who oppose governmental regulation and other restraints to protect the environment and planet. Mann, lead author of the original paper in which the Hockey Stick first appeared, shares the story of the science and politics behind this controversy. He reveals key figures in the oil and energy industries and the media frontgroups who do their bidding in sometimes slick, sometimes bare-knuckled ways. Mann concludes with the real story of the 2009 "Climategate" scandal, in which climate scientists' emails were hacked. This is essential reading for all who care about our planet's health and our own well-being.
The Hockey Stick achieved prominence in a 2001 UN report on climate change and quickly became a central icon in the "climate wars." The real issue has never been the graph's data but rather its implied threat to those who oppose governmental regulation and other restraints to protect the environment and planet. Mann, lead author of the original paper in which the Hockey Stick first appeared, shares the story of the science and politics behind this controversy. He reveals key figures in the oil and energy industries and the media frontgroups who do their bidding in sometimes slick, sometimes bare-knuckled ways. Mann concludes with the real story of the 2009 "Climategate" scandal, in which climate scientists' emails were hacked. This is essential reading for all who care about our planet's health and our own well-being.
448 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2012
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 78 reviews
January 25, 2019
Short review: a thoroughly researched, meticulously referenced, carefully worded guide to the 'controversy' around global warming, written by a central figure in the debate.
Longer review:
Full disclosure, I have a fair bit more knowledge of climate science than your average Joe. The physics degree and PhD in atmospheric physics make it impossible for me to view this book as a member of the general public. That said, however, I found it to be an engaging, extremely thorough review of the evidence for and science behind anthropogenic global warming, though that is not why I read it.
I read this book to better understand why some people are violently opposed to the idea of man-made climate change, and the campaigns orchestrated by powerful organisations to cultivate this view in the public. In this regard the book is an unmitigated success, drawing on the author's personal experience and extensive references to highlight the origins and evolution of these campaigns. It would be a five star book for both clarity and content, however I feel compelled to a star off my rating purely because Mann conceived the book as more of a personal account than a textbook. While this definitely makes the book more appealing to a general audience via the human connection, at times I longed for a return to a more academic style when the writing effectively degenerated into X happened, then I did Y, and then Z cleared my name of all wrongdoing after lengthy investigation (spoiler: this happens a lot).
Like I say though, my perception of the book was definitely altered by my background, and so to a general audience I think this editorial decision will probably work as a net positive. Obviously you have to bear in mind that this is an individual's retelling of events, and thus there may be a certain amount of individual bias involved in the retelling, but this is an excellent account of how climate science works, how it has been attacked, and explains where all those pernicious myths came from. Good read.
Longer review:
Full disclosure, I have a fair bit more knowledge of climate science than your average Joe. The physics degree and PhD in atmospheric physics make it impossible for me to view this book as a member of the general public. That said, however, I found it to be an engaging, extremely thorough review of the evidence for and science behind anthropogenic global warming, though that is not why I read it.
I read this book to better understand why some people are violently opposed to the idea of man-made climate change, and the campaigns orchestrated by powerful organisations to cultivate this view in the public. In this regard the book is an unmitigated success, drawing on the author's personal experience and extensive references to highlight the origins and evolution of these campaigns. It would be a five star book for both clarity and content, however I feel compelled to a star off my rating purely because Mann conceived the book as more of a personal account than a textbook. While this definitely makes the book more appealing to a general audience via the human connection, at times I longed for a return to a more academic style when the writing effectively degenerated into X happened, then I did Y, and then Z cleared my name of all wrongdoing after lengthy investigation (spoiler: this happens a lot).
Like I say though, my perception of the book was definitely altered by my background, and so to a general audience I think this editorial decision will probably work as a net positive. Obviously you have to bear in mind that this is an individual's retelling of events, and thus there may be a certain amount of individual bias involved in the retelling, but this is an excellent account of how climate science works, how it has been attacked, and explains where all those pernicious myths came from. Good read.
June 16, 2012
I first became familiar with the name Michael Mann in the year 2003. I was working on what would become my book The Republican War on Science, and had learned of two related events: The controversy over the Soon and Baliunas paper in Climate Research, purporting to refute Mann and his colleagues' famous 1998 "hockey stick" study; and a congressional hearing convened by Senator James Inhofe, at which Mann testified. Inhofe tried to wheel out the Soon and Baliunas work as if they'd dealt some sort of killer blow against climate science. In fact, just before the hearing, several editors of Climate Research had resigned over the paper.
I went on to stand up for Mann, and his work, in Republican War. Little did I know, at the time, that he himself would become the leading defender of his scientific field against political attacks.
Recently, Mann came out with a new book about his travails entitled The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches From the Front Lines, detailing his decade long battle against political attacks and misrepresentations. The response has been all too predictable. For months, conservatives have been giving it one star reviews on Amazon.com, some of which suggest that they probably haven't read it.
What is most fascinating to me is that the science the right is attacking Mann over--principally, the 1998 hockey stick study and its 1999 extension, as prominently exhibited in 2001 by the IPCC--is relatively old news. Indeed, and as Mann himself explains in the book, "attacks against the hockey stick...were not really about the work itself." That work has been supported by other researchers--there is now a veritable "hockey team," Mann notes--and anyways, the case for human caused global warming never depended on the validity of the hockey stick alone. It was always just one part of a far broader body of evidence.
Thus, conservatives who fixated on Mann, and continue to do so, tell us through their own actions that this is not really about scientific inquiry at all. If it was, then they'd be doing something quite different from giving Mann one star Amazon reviews.
But of course, climate researchers have been making observations like these for years. It hasn't mattered nearly as much as it should, though, because they've often lacked the communication skills to get their point across. If anything, their scientific training has tended to hobble them in a brass knuckles fight such as this one. And that, to me, is where Mann's new book matters the most: It shows that he has developed the communication skills to match his unquestionable scientific talent--and moreover, that he has done so because the right forced him to.
That's why Mann is such an inspiring example for all who care about the climate issue--and why his book is required reading. From the early "hockey stick" battles all the way up through "ClimateGate" and the Ken Cuccinelli inquiry, Mann didn't give an inch. He didn't back down; to the contrary, he showed what toughness actually means. And in the process, from the founding of RealClimate.org in 2004 up through the publication of this book, he evolved into a passionate communicator and advocate. Having had him on my podcast Point of Inquiry and heard him lecture, I can assure you that many scientists should take a lesson from him.
Through all this, Mann emerged as a charismatic example of what we should all strive for in the face of ideological adversity and unfair attacks. Mann himself has a powerful analogy for all of this in the book, one that shows just how much he has developed as a communicator and an advocate. He calls it the "Serengeti Strategy," based on what he saw on a vacation in Africa:
"Among the most striking and curious scenes I saw that day were groups of zebras standing back to back, forming a continuous wall of vertical stripes. "Why do they do this?" an IPCC colleague asked the tour guide. "To confuse the lions," he explained. Predators, in what I call the "Serengeti strategy," look for the most vulnerable animals at the edge of a herd. But they have difficulty picking out an individual zebra to attack when it is seamlessly incorporated into the larger group, lost in this case in a continuous wall of stripes. Only later would I understand the profound lesson this scene from nature had to offer me and my fellow climate scientists in the years to come."
To be sure, the book is not simply about how Mann was forced to fight back against misrepresentations, and even congressional and legal inquiries. It's also his personal story. He started out as a math geek trying to program a computer to play tic-tac-toe, like in the movie War Games (ah, the Eighties!). He ended up pursuing paleoclimatology out of intellectual interest and fascination; he never imagined he would end up as much a political combatant as a researcher.
Despite my praise for Mann and his book--and I even gave it a cover blurb--I do have some differences with him. For instance, I think that here and in his public comments, Mann tends to focus too heavily on the idea that resistance to climate science, and his research, is corporate driven. Or as he puts it in the book: "well organized, well-funded, and orchestrated." In contrast, I have increasingly come to think it is primarily ideological--driven by libertarian individualism, and those who embrace this view and its associated emotions--and the corporate connection is secondary (though often real). I thus think that focusing on it too much misleads us as to the nature of the opposition, which has grown so ideological at this point--and so driven by gut emotion--that it does the traditionally pragmatic business community no favors. If anything, it is out of synch with its own presumptive allies.
But this difference doesn't matter when it comes to defending scientific reality. There, I stand with Mann, because he taught me through his own example how to do so. And you should as well.
How? Start by buying his book; and after you've read it, go refute the one-star Amazon commenters and add your own informed take. And throughout it all, remember the Serengeti analogy--although really, I must say that I think it doesn't do Mann justice. This guy is no zebra. For climate researchers, and researchers anywhere who fall under political attack, he's something much more important: A leader.
Source: Desmogblog [...]
I went on to stand up for Mann, and his work, in Republican War. Little did I know, at the time, that he himself would become the leading defender of his scientific field against political attacks.
Recently, Mann came out with a new book about his travails entitled The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches From the Front Lines, detailing his decade long battle against political attacks and misrepresentations. The response has been all too predictable. For months, conservatives have been giving it one star reviews on Amazon.com, some of which suggest that they probably haven't read it.
What is most fascinating to me is that the science the right is attacking Mann over--principally, the 1998 hockey stick study and its 1999 extension, as prominently exhibited in 2001 by the IPCC--is relatively old news. Indeed, and as Mann himself explains in the book, "attacks against the hockey stick...were not really about the work itself." That work has been supported by other researchers--there is now a veritable "hockey team," Mann notes--and anyways, the case for human caused global warming never depended on the validity of the hockey stick alone. It was always just one part of a far broader body of evidence.
Thus, conservatives who fixated on Mann, and continue to do so, tell us through their own actions that this is not really about scientific inquiry at all. If it was, then they'd be doing something quite different from giving Mann one star Amazon reviews.
But of course, climate researchers have been making observations like these for years. It hasn't mattered nearly as much as it should, though, because they've often lacked the communication skills to get their point across. If anything, their scientific training has tended to hobble them in a brass knuckles fight such as this one. And that, to me, is where Mann's new book matters the most: It shows that he has developed the communication skills to match his unquestionable scientific talent--and moreover, that he has done so because the right forced him to.
That's why Mann is such an inspiring example for all who care about the climate issue--and why his book is required reading. From the early "hockey stick" battles all the way up through "ClimateGate" and the Ken Cuccinelli inquiry, Mann didn't give an inch. He didn't back down; to the contrary, he showed what toughness actually means. And in the process, from the founding of RealClimate.org in 2004 up through the publication of this book, he evolved into a passionate communicator and advocate. Having had him on my podcast Point of Inquiry and heard him lecture, I can assure you that many scientists should take a lesson from him.
Through all this, Mann emerged as a charismatic example of what we should all strive for in the face of ideological adversity and unfair attacks. Mann himself has a powerful analogy for all of this in the book, one that shows just how much he has developed as a communicator and an advocate. He calls it the "Serengeti Strategy," based on what he saw on a vacation in Africa:
"Among the most striking and curious scenes I saw that day were groups of zebras standing back to back, forming a continuous wall of vertical stripes. "Why do they do this?" an IPCC colleague asked the tour guide. "To confuse the lions," he explained. Predators, in what I call the "Serengeti strategy," look for the most vulnerable animals at the edge of a herd. But they have difficulty picking out an individual zebra to attack when it is seamlessly incorporated into the larger group, lost in this case in a continuous wall of stripes. Only later would I understand the profound lesson this scene from nature had to offer me and my fellow climate scientists in the years to come."
To be sure, the book is not simply about how Mann was forced to fight back against misrepresentations, and even congressional and legal inquiries. It's also his personal story. He started out as a math geek trying to program a computer to play tic-tac-toe, like in the movie War Games (ah, the Eighties!). He ended up pursuing paleoclimatology out of intellectual interest and fascination; he never imagined he would end up as much a political combatant as a researcher.
Despite my praise for Mann and his book--and I even gave it a cover blurb--I do have some differences with him. For instance, I think that here and in his public comments, Mann tends to focus too heavily on the idea that resistance to climate science, and his research, is corporate driven. Or as he puts it in the book: "well organized, well-funded, and orchestrated." In contrast, I have increasingly come to think it is primarily ideological--driven by libertarian individualism, and those who embrace this view and its associated emotions--and the corporate connection is secondary (though often real). I thus think that focusing on it too much misleads us as to the nature of the opposition, which has grown so ideological at this point--and so driven by gut emotion--that it does the traditionally pragmatic business community no favors. If anything, it is out of synch with its own presumptive allies.
But this difference doesn't matter when it comes to defending scientific reality. There, I stand with Mann, because he taught me through his own example how to do so. And you should as well.
How? Start by buying his book; and after you've read it, go refute the one-star Amazon commenters and add your own informed take. And throughout it all, remember the Serengeti analogy--although really, I must say that I think it doesn't do Mann justice. This guy is no zebra. For climate researchers, and researchers anywhere who fall under political attack, he's something much more important: A leader.
Source: Desmogblog [...]
January 7, 2015
As an engineer and someone who was brought up conservative I've never had so much disrespect for the Republicans as I have after reading this book. Their dishonesty and tactics are reprehensible. I'm angry at having been duped for so long.
May 28, 2012
If you are a skeptic or in doubt and actually have an expectation to get some direct replies of the Hockey stick dispute from McIntyre you will be greatly disappointed. The funniest (or saddest) reply Mann comes up with is where the "deniers" claim he got rid of Medieval Warming and Little Ice Age - Mann's reply is: "it's there" (!) Where? Because I cannot see it. Emperor new clothes, perhaps?
The term "Hockey Stick" is a statistical derogatory term for "Junk Science" or even "Fraud", so Mann's attempt to defuse the term by using it himself doesn't change the meaning - nice try, though.
According to Mann "trick" doesn't mean "trick", and "hide the decline" doesn't mean "hide the decline"....
So I guess in 20 years time someone will claim "Global Warming" doesn't really mean "Global Warming".
The term "Hockey Stick" is a statistical derogatory term for "Junk Science" or even "Fraud", so Mann's attempt to defuse the term by using it himself doesn't change the meaning - nice try, though.
According to Mann "trick" doesn't mean "trick", and "hide the decline" doesn't mean "hide the decline"....
So I guess in 20 years time someone will claim "Global Warming" doesn't really mean "Global Warming".
January 6, 2015
Michael Mann and his hockey stick. Trust me, it's all true.
May 26, 2017
Straight from the horse's mouth -- or at least from the mouth of the climate scientist most famous for his role as co-architect of the famous Hockey Stick graph showing the dramatic increase of atmospheric temperatures over recent decades -- here's an account of the war against climate science waged by vested interests (primarily the fossil-fuels industries), the politicians, media bloviators and even a few cupiditous scientists who act as their often very well paid shills, and their useful idiots.
This is in part a personal account of what it's like to be the target of so much mercenary and/or moronic hatred, in part a memoir of Mann's explorations to date of climate science, and in part an explanation of the science itself and a (usually respectful, sometimes hilarious) demolition of the few non-ludicrous papers that have been published that go against the scientific consensus that our planet is warming, dangerously so, primarily as a result of human activity. Mann is unafraid to name names and detail financial links.
Throughout it all we get a real sense of Mann's enthusiasm for his science: this is someone who loves the thrill of discovery, someone who has adopted the role of warrior solely because he's been forced into it.
I started to read the book merely for enjoyment, having recently romped through Mann's collaboration with Tom Toles -- and indeed I was gripped much of the time and never less than absorbed -- but I soon found myself taking notes: there's a lot that's of interest here that I hadn't known.
People who lack science altogether may find a couple of the sections of the book a bit tough unless they concentrate, but anyone who's watched more than a few Nova documentaries should have no real trouble.
I went into The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars with little respect for those who deliberately deny climate science (a large part of one of my own books is about them) and their useful idiots -- there's only a hazy demarcation between "underinformed" and "willfully ignorant" and "childishly obtuse" -- and I came away from this book with even less. Politicians like Hitler and Stalin and Mao were responsible for deaths in the tens of millions; their modern counterparts, through obstruction of action on climate change, are likely, purely for the sake of their personal monetary gain or their narcissistic self-aggrandizement, to be responsible for a death toll that completely dwarfs those of their predecessors . . . if not a calamity worse than that.
This is in part a personal account of what it's like to be the target of so much mercenary and/or moronic hatred, in part a memoir of Mann's explorations to date of climate science, and in part an explanation of the science itself and a (usually respectful, sometimes hilarious) demolition of the few non-ludicrous papers that have been published that go against the scientific consensus that our planet is warming, dangerously so, primarily as a result of human activity. Mann is unafraid to name names and detail financial links.
Throughout it all we get a real sense of Mann's enthusiasm for his science: this is someone who loves the thrill of discovery, someone who has adopted the role of warrior solely because he's been forced into it.
I started to read the book merely for enjoyment, having recently romped through Mann's collaboration with Tom Toles -- and indeed I was gripped much of the time and never less than absorbed -- but I soon found myself taking notes: there's a lot that's of interest here that I hadn't known.
People who lack science altogether may find a couple of the sections of the book a bit tough unless they concentrate, but anyone who's watched more than a few Nova documentaries should have no real trouble.
I went into The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars with little respect for those who deliberately deny climate science (a large part of one of my own books is about them) and their useful idiots -- there's only a hazy demarcation between "underinformed" and "willfully ignorant" and "childishly obtuse" -- and I came away from this book with even less. Politicians like Hitler and Stalin and Mao were responsible for deaths in the tens of millions; their modern counterparts, through obstruction of action on climate change, are likely, purely for the sake of their personal monetary gain or their narcissistic self-aggrandizement, to be responsible for a death toll that completely dwarfs those of their predecessors . . . if not a calamity worse than that.
July 6, 2015
This is an important book to read. Not so much for Mann's explaining his position on climate change--but for the horrific politicization of science. one of the most distressing elements of the scorched earth partisan politics is that science has now been politicized. Political actors who don't like what scientists conclude now simply hire their own acolytes to prepare predictably harsh critiques of scientists. And, to make matters dicier, there are rogue scientists who fabricate data or sell their services to highest bidders.
But, at some level, we have to depend on the scientific enterprise to inform policy makers of how things work, what proposals are likely to address societal problems, and so on. When science is politicized, we face an unfortunate situation. Whoever can buy the most persuasive research may win out. We have people asserting that vaccines are deadly in their effects, that climate change is af fraud, that the eart is only several thousand years old. . . . My perspective? What is wrong with us as a nation when everything is up for bid?
Anyhow, this is a book that traces Michael Mann's career and the political context in which he has researched climate change. Disclaimer: I am a professor at Penn State as he is. But I don't know him outside of his work. He discusses the early stages of his research as a young scholar and how he became involved with the circle of scientists working on climate change. He does a nice job of explaining his approach and methods.
He also discusses the politicization of climate change. He notes the "science for hire" approach by opponents of climate change (it is hard not to use those terms; the majority of scientists who have taken a position on the subject in refereed, peer-reviewed publications accept the concept). While the peer review process is not infallible, it is surely better than "research for hire."
The book is as to some extent a personal as well as (more typically) a scientific document. I get a sense sometimes that Mann fells a bit sorry for himself (but I can't blame him as he has been singled out by many critics--including some reviewers here--as the devil himself).
At any rate, this is a very good work to get a sense of the inside story of the politics of climate change. A very good investment to have purchased this book.
But, at some level, we have to depend on the scientific enterprise to inform policy makers of how things work, what proposals are likely to address societal problems, and so on. When science is politicized, we face an unfortunate situation. Whoever can buy the most persuasive research may win out. We have people asserting that vaccines are deadly in their effects, that climate change is af fraud, that the eart is only several thousand years old. . . . My perspective? What is wrong with us as a nation when everything is up for bid?
Anyhow, this is a book that traces Michael Mann's career and the political context in which he has researched climate change. Disclaimer: I am a professor at Penn State as he is. But I don't know him outside of his work. He discusses the early stages of his research as a young scholar and how he became involved with the circle of scientists working on climate change. He does a nice job of explaining his approach and methods.
He also discusses the politicization of climate change. He notes the "science for hire" approach by opponents of climate change (it is hard not to use those terms; the majority of scientists who have taken a position on the subject in refereed, peer-reviewed publications accept the concept). While the peer review process is not infallible, it is surely better than "research for hire."
The book is as to some extent a personal as well as (more typically) a scientific document. I get a sense sometimes that Mann fells a bit sorry for himself (but I can't blame him as he has been singled out by many critics--including some reviewers here--as the devil himself).
At any rate, this is a very good work to get a sense of the inside story of the politics of climate change. A very good investment to have purchased this book.
August 25, 2019
The book is good and it’s well-written, but I felt like I was dragging my heels through reading this the whole time. I think because I’ve read Dr. Mann’s other books, along with other books/paper/articles about climate science, climate change, climate change + politics, I see stuff about climate change everyday on twitter, etc. that this just felt like a rehashing of stuff I’ve already read. It’s a good book, but felt repetitive for me because I’ve read bits and pieces of what Dr. Mann wrote about over the years, and that made it a bit harder/boring for me to read. But again, it’s a good, well-written book, and I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to know more about climate change research.
April 16, 2015
Michael Mann is at the forefront of the climate debate, both as a researcher into the science of global warming and as a target of those who have politicized the issue. Mann is a professor at Penn State University and directs the Penn State Earth System Science Center. The results of his research demonstrate not only that the earth is warming in a way that is unprecedented in the planet’s history, but that this warming is due to human activities (a view that is shared by the vast majority of the world’s climate scientists). Mann’s main contribution was the famous hockey stick graph (see below) showing the increasing global temperatures since the start of the industrial revolution. The gray shading represents the error associated with early data that was extrapolated from proxy data (such as tree rings, corals and ice cores).
Of course by producing such a visually compelling image, Mann’s research has put him in the cross-hairs of the climate denialists, a group that consists of fossil fuel and business interests, and political partisans with an anti-regulatory mindset. It should be noted that the few remaining skeptics with a scientific background obtain their funding from these same partisan interests, leading one to question their impartiality. As Upton Sinclair said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"
Despite these moneyed interests who have been significantly motivated to not understanding, the graph has stood up to intense scrutiny and additional studies have only strengthened the conclusion that temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere during recent decades were the highest in the past 1,300 years! Of course, since the graph’s creation, things have only become worse with the temperatures reached during the summer of 2012 breaking new records around the world.
Mann himself lays out this evidence quite conclusively in the book and also goes into some detail about the depths to which the motivated reasoning interests have sunk to attack and smear when their efforts to sow scientific doubt have failed. Even though their tactics haven’t changed, the “thank you for smoking” crowd still seems to be effective despite a solid track record of being wrong, and wrong again (think asbestos, leaded gasoline, acid rain, the ozone hole, cigarettes, mercury and so on).
Mann’s e-mails were also stolen as part of the so-called climategate “scandal” in which denialists cherry picked certain phrases in order to manufacture the impression that scientists were fudging the data. Once again, Mann and his colleagues were vindicated by eight independent investigations that all found that there was no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct.
Unfortunately, it’s far easier to raise questions and doubt than to do the hard work of gathering evidence, performing experiments and publishing papers in peer reviewed journals and these unscrupulous tactics continue to play with a scientifically illiterate public. The good news is that scientists are finally starting to fight back (as evidenced by this book) making it harder and harder for vested interests to continue to deny reality.
Of course by producing such a visually compelling image, Mann’s research has put him in the cross-hairs of the climate denialists, a group that consists of fossil fuel and business interests, and political partisans with an anti-regulatory mindset. It should be noted that the few remaining skeptics with a scientific background obtain their funding from these same partisan interests, leading one to question their impartiality. As Upton Sinclair said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"
Despite these moneyed interests who have been significantly motivated to not understanding, the graph has stood up to intense scrutiny and additional studies have only strengthened the conclusion that temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere during recent decades were the highest in the past 1,300 years! Of course, since the graph’s creation, things have only become worse with the temperatures reached during the summer of 2012 breaking new records around the world.
Mann himself lays out this evidence quite conclusively in the book and also goes into some detail about the depths to which the motivated reasoning interests have sunk to attack and smear when their efforts to sow scientific doubt have failed. Even though their tactics haven’t changed, the “thank you for smoking” crowd still seems to be effective despite a solid track record of being wrong, and wrong again (think asbestos, leaded gasoline, acid rain, the ozone hole, cigarettes, mercury and so on).
Mann’s e-mails were also stolen as part of the so-called climategate “scandal” in which denialists cherry picked certain phrases in order to manufacture the impression that scientists were fudging the data. Once again, Mann and his colleagues were vindicated by eight independent investigations that all found that there was no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct.
Unfortunately, it’s far easier to raise questions and doubt than to do the hard work of gathering evidence, performing experiments and publishing papers in peer reviewed journals and these unscrupulous tactics continue to play with a scientifically illiterate public. The good news is that scientists are finally starting to fight back (as evidenced by this book) making it harder and harder for vested interests to continue to deny reality.
November 6, 2012
The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars by Michael E. Mann
"The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars" is the interesting and revealing story of the fossil fuel industries assault on the science of global warming and its quest to undermine the policies devised to address it. This book tells the real story about the "controversies" behind the iconic symbol of the hockey stick and the scientists involved in the climate change debate. Dr. Michael E. Mann is a member of the Penn State University faculty, and the author of more than 150 peer-reviewed and edited publications, and has published two books: Dire Predictions: Understanding Global Warming in 2008 and this fine book. Mann takes us to the front lines of climate wars and reveals to the readers the key figures behind the disinformation and the "climategate" scandal. This enlightening 384-page book is composed of the following fifteen chapters: 1. Born in War, 2. Climate Science Comes of Age, 3. Signals in the Noise, 4. The Making of the Hockey Stick, 5. The Origins of Denial, 6. A Candle in the Dark, 7. In the Line of Fire, 8. Hockey Stick Goes to Washington, 9. When You Get Your Picture on the Cover of..., 10. Say It Ain't So, (Smokey) Joe!, 11. A Tale of Two Reports, 12. Heads of the Hydra, 13. The Battle of the Bulge, Climategate: The Real Story, and 15. Fighting Back.
Positives:
1. Well-researched and topical book. Accessible for the masses.
2. Courageous scientist who has a revealing and important story to share.
3. Great format, author provides much-needed abbreviations and acronyms.
4. The historical background on the assault on scientists.
5. Climate change in five easy steps. Provides readers with accessible information on what causes climate change.
6. The scientific consensus that humans had warmed the planet and changed the climate. The reasons why the consensus was reached.
7. Climate models and the challenges.
8. The six stages of climate change denial. The origins of denial. The figures behind the denial and the tactics used (the Serengeti strategy). The figures who bankrolled the climate change denial machine. The victims of such tactics.
9. How science works and how it applies to climate change. The importance of the peer review process and healthy scientific skepticism.
10. The story behind the iconic symbol of the hockey stick.
11. The author does a wonderful job of going over the main objections against climate change.
12. The scientization of politics. The politicians with an agenda and who stifle scientific progress. Political intimidation. The congressional hearings. Infuriating stuff.
13. The 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) and its conclusions.
14. The four main pillars of denial that contrarians continued to cling to. Great stuff.
15. What we know and don't know about climate change.
16. The real story behind "Climategate" and its impact.
17. The scientists strike back.
18. Future challenges.
19. Excellent glossary, notes section and bibliography. Links worked great!
Negatives:
1. Some parts of this book are quite dry. As an example, the detailed explanation of Principal Component Analysis I fear will put most readers to sleep.
2. The book lacks panache. As a good scientist Dr. Mann sticks to the facts and that's all well and good, but compelling reading also requires a degree of entertainment.
3. A table summarizing the main organizations behind the climate denial machine would have added value.
In summary, this is a very revealing book. The assault on science is troubling and infuriating. Dr. Mann is/was at the front lines of the climate change wars and provides the readers with an enlightening book. He makes it clear that society has two choices: "We can ignore the science...or we can act in the public interest to reduce the threat of global climate change". He makes the compelling case that we must act. Find out why. I highly recommend this book!
Further recommendations: "Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming" by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway, "Energy for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines" by Richard A. Muller. "Science Under Siege: Defending Science, Exposing Pseudoscience" by Kendrick Frazier, "Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free" by Charles P. Perce, "Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America" by Shawn Lawrence Otto, "Changing Planet, Changing Health: How the Climate Crisis Threatens Our Health and What We Can Do about It" by Paul R. Epstein, "Storms of My Grandchildren: The Truth About the Coming Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity" by James Hansen, "Science Matters: Achieving Scientific Literacy" by Robert M. Hazen, "The Crash Course: The Unsustainable Future Of Our Economy, Energy, And Environment" by Chris Martenson, "Warnings: The True Story of How Science Tamed the Weather" by Mike Smith and "Lies, Damned Lies, and Science: How to Sort Through the Noise Around Global Warming, the Latest Health Claims, and Other Scientific Controversies" Sherry Seethaler.
"The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars" is the interesting and revealing story of the fossil fuel industries assault on the science of global warming and its quest to undermine the policies devised to address it. This book tells the real story about the "controversies" behind the iconic symbol of the hockey stick and the scientists involved in the climate change debate. Dr. Michael E. Mann is a member of the Penn State University faculty, and the author of more than 150 peer-reviewed and edited publications, and has published two books: Dire Predictions: Understanding Global Warming in 2008 and this fine book. Mann takes us to the front lines of climate wars and reveals to the readers the key figures behind the disinformation and the "climategate" scandal. This enlightening 384-page book is composed of the following fifteen chapters: 1. Born in War, 2. Climate Science Comes of Age, 3. Signals in the Noise, 4. The Making of the Hockey Stick, 5. The Origins of Denial, 6. A Candle in the Dark, 7. In the Line of Fire, 8. Hockey Stick Goes to Washington, 9. When You Get Your Picture on the Cover of..., 10. Say It Ain't So, (Smokey) Joe!, 11. A Tale of Two Reports, 12. Heads of the Hydra, 13. The Battle of the Bulge, Climategate: The Real Story, and 15. Fighting Back.
Positives:
1. Well-researched and topical book. Accessible for the masses.
2. Courageous scientist who has a revealing and important story to share.
3. Great format, author provides much-needed abbreviations and acronyms.
4. The historical background on the assault on scientists.
5. Climate change in five easy steps. Provides readers with accessible information on what causes climate change.
6. The scientific consensus that humans had warmed the planet and changed the climate. The reasons why the consensus was reached.
7. Climate models and the challenges.
8. The six stages of climate change denial. The origins of denial. The figures behind the denial and the tactics used (the Serengeti strategy). The figures who bankrolled the climate change denial machine. The victims of such tactics.
9. How science works and how it applies to climate change. The importance of the peer review process and healthy scientific skepticism.
10. The story behind the iconic symbol of the hockey stick.
11. The author does a wonderful job of going over the main objections against climate change.
12. The scientization of politics. The politicians with an agenda and who stifle scientific progress. Political intimidation. The congressional hearings. Infuriating stuff.
13. The 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) and its conclusions.
14. The four main pillars of denial that contrarians continued to cling to. Great stuff.
15. What we know and don't know about climate change.
16. The real story behind "Climategate" and its impact.
17. The scientists strike back.
18. Future challenges.
19. Excellent glossary, notes section and bibliography. Links worked great!
Negatives:
1. Some parts of this book are quite dry. As an example, the detailed explanation of Principal Component Analysis I fear will put most readers to sleep.
2. The book lacks panache. As a good scientist Dr. Mann sticks to the facts and that's all well and good, but compelling reading also requires a degree of entertainment.
3. A table summarizing the main organizations behind the climate denial machine would have added value.
In summary, this is a very revealing book. The assault on science is troubling and infuriating. Dr. Mann is/was at the front lines of the climate change wars and provides the readers with an enlightening book. He makes it clear that society has two choices: "We can ignore the science...or we can act in the public interest to reduce the threat of global climate change". He makes the compelling case that we must act. Find out why. I highly recommend this book!
Further recommendations: "Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming" by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway, "Energy for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines" by Richard A. Muller. "Science Under Siege: Defending Science, Exposing Pseudoscience" by Kendrick Frazier, "Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free" by Charles P. Perce, "Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America" by Shawn Lawrence Otto, "Changing Planet, Changing Health: How the Climate Crisis Threatens Our Health and What We Can Do about It" by Paul R. Epstein, "Storms of My Grandchildren: The Truth About the Coming Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity" by James Hansen, "Science Matters: Achieving Scientific Literacy" by Robert M. Hazen, "The Crash Course: The Unsustainable Future Of Our Economy, Energy, And Environment" by Chris Martenson, "Warnings: The True Story of How Science Tamed the Weather" by Mike Smith and "Lies, Damned Lies, and Science: How to Sort Through the Noise Around Global Warming, the Latest Health Claims, and Other Scientific Controversies" Sherry Seethaler.
May 21, 2014
This is an excellent book covering the "climate wars." Michael Mann, contrary to the whining of some reviewers who appear to be part of the climate denial crowd, writes with modesty and restraint about his career in climate research and the many attacks against his work. He closes this newest edition of the book with an extensive afterword which brings some of the issues up to date. He also expresses continuing optimism that America will eventually come around ant get serious about doing what needs to be done to prevent climate change.
Having a science background, especially a BS in a science area, certainly helps in reading this book, as he does cover some fairly technical issues at times, but even someone with just a passing understanding of science can get quite a lot out of this book. This book deserves to be much more widely read.
Having a science background, especially a BS in a science area, certainly helps in reading this book, as he does cover some fairly technical issues at times, but even someone with just a passing understanding of science can get quite a lot out of this book. This book deserves to be much more widely read.
December 31, 2018
This book is an excellent primer on the freaky works of denying demonstrable reality in exchange for political tribalistic lies; scientists like Dr. Mann have been assaulted, persecuted, and oppressed for stating demonstrable facts, and this book shows how and why. The book also explains the basics regarding MBH98 and MBH99, and how the world's geophysicists have concluded that humans are the cause of the sharp and unprecedented rise in global average temperature.
October 10, 2016
An insightful view from the trenches
Dr. Mann recounts the realities of climate denial in US policy. A must read for those interested in saving our planet from the worst effects of anthropogenic climate change
Dr. Mann recounts the realities of climate denial in US policy. A must read for those interested in saving our planet from the worst effects of anthropogenic climate change
November 28, 2012
super book! demolishes climate change deniers and the whole notion of a "ClimateGate" scandal.
April 15, 2021
If you thought you were reading a book that describes the chemistry and mechanics of climate change, this book is not for you. The book describes how Mann starting his professional life as a climatologist who just wanted to get the best model that he could of the climate. He fell foul of vested interests when he came up with what was coined the "Hockey Stick" graph which showed that the last decades have become increasingly warm and this could only be due to the effect of humans buring fossil fuels releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Mann gets targetted by politicians and hired guns for the fossil fuel companies. A more timid person might have allowed himself to be cowed and perhaps even recant but luckily like scientists before him eg Galileo , he did not. How this must have affected him is impossible to understand. He was threatened and so was his family.
The last paragraph of the book is poignant and I must say that understand how he thinks. I cannot watch nature shows because I know that humans are spoiling the planet.
Hear hear, Michael !!!
are you listening Scott Morrison and Angus Taylor??
Mann gets targetted by politicians and hired guns for the fossil fuel companies. A more timid person might have allowed himself to be cowed and perhaps even recant but luckily like scientists before him eg Galileo , he did not. How this must have affected him is impossible to understand. He was threatened and so was his family.
The last paragraph of the book is poignant and I must say that understand how he thinks. I cannot watch nature shows because I know that humans are spoiling the planet.
It is the combination of enthusiasm and concern that I have witnessed - especially among the youth of America - that gives me hope that despite the significant obstacles that remain, we will meet the monumental challenge that lies ahead of us: the challenge to preserve this planet for our children, grandchildren, and generations to come.
Hear hear, Michael !!!
are you listening Scott Morrison and Angus Taylor??
August 21, 2025
This is the story of a modern Inquisition, the persecution of innocent men and the courage and resolution of at least one man to stand up to the bullying of government, corporations and a press alternating between the psychopathic and the craven, irredeemably corrupted by the doctrine of meretricious balance and far too close to the politicians and directors it should be holding to account. It is the story of a war on science and on scientists tried for heresy. It is the story of the denialist David armed with only Republican Party orthodoxy, the Murdoch press and the backing of Exxon against a terrifying Goliath wielding the irresistible might of an academic salary. It might make you feel like slapping someone. It certainly made me feel that way.
The story ends well. It was issued before Sandy intervened in the US Presidential race, so it may end even better than Mann documents. Either way, even if US politics does not wake up this year, scientists seem to have done. The denialists have been poking the sleeping Zeus of scientific comradeship and now pebbles are starting to stir on the slopes of Psiloritis, ancient Olympus. Mann's last chapter details this awakening conscience and leaves one feeling soothed after the preceding apoplexy.
Mann is quite a man. The sustained barrage of defamation that he details here beggars belief, and while it was by no means focused solely on himself he has been the most consistently resolute and combative among its chosen victims. I'm not sure I wouldn't have been stirred to despair or violence. In the end, however, truth always wins out - as Feynmann observed, you can't fool reality - and Mann's resolution is vindicated. In case after case, investigations by Congress, Parliament and academe exonerate the defamed. In case after case,shoddy research by denialist stooges is torn down by the slow, finely-grinding wheels of subsequent research. Mann documents all this without resorting to polemic.
He also includes the clearest exposition of the technique of principal component analysis I have ever encountered, one informed by Stephen Jay Gould, another hero of mine. Feynmann and Twain are drawn into the mix, rendering a perfectly seasoned dish. It is worth commenting that Mann's objectivity appears to be above reproach. The only new feedback mechanism he has ever advocated - and I checked - was actually negative, and thus would have tended to undermine the strong conclusions on anthropogenic warming with which he is associated. A far cry from Lindzen, the sign of whose feedbacks you know before they are even published, or Christy and Spencer who were caught out with four consecutive errors of convenient sign without so much as a subtle clearing of the throat from Judith Curry.
I nominate the following heroes among this pantheon, aside from Mann himself: John McCain and Sherwood Boehlert, for having the intellectual courage to break party lines and stand up for the scientists. The list of villains is too long and depressing to recount, and of course I decline to plug them in to the oxygen mask of publicity. Fasten your seatbelt before reading this, and lay in a supply of chestnuts to roast in front of the pyres the inquisitors seem no longer to be destined to use.
The story ends well. It was issued before Sandy intervened in the US Presidential race, so it may end even better than Mann documents. Either way, even if US politics does not wake up this year, scientists seem to have done. The denialists have been poking the sleeping Zeus of scientific comradeship and now pebbles are starting to stir on the slopes of Psiloritis, ancient Olympus. Mann's last chapter details this awakening conscience and leaves one feeling soothed after the preceding apoplexy.
Mann is quite a man. The sustained barrage of defamation that he details here beggars belief, and while it was by no means focused solely on himself he has been the most consistently resolute and combative among its chosen victims. I'm not sure I wouldn't have been stirred to despair or violence. In the end, however, truth always wins out - as Feynmann observed, you can't fool reality - and Mann's resolution is vindicated. In case after case, investigations by Congress, Parliament and academe exonerate the defamed. In case after case,shoddy research by denialist stooges is torn down by the slow, finely-grinding wheels of subsequent research. Mann documents all this without resorting to polemic.
He also includes the clearest exposition of the technique of principal component analysis I have ever encountered, one informed by Stephen Jay Gould, another hero of mine. Feynmann and Twain are drawn into the mix, rendering a perfectly seasoned dish. It is worth commenting that Mann's objectivity appears to be above reproach. The only new feedback mechanism he has ever advocated - and I checked - was actually negative, and thus would have tended to undermine the strong conclusions on anthropogenic warming with which he is associated. A far cry from Lindzen, the sign of whose feedbacks you know before they are even published, or Christy and Spencer who were caught out with four consecutive errors of convenient sign without so much as a subtle clearing of the throat from Judith Curry.
I nominate the following heroes among this pantheon, aside from Mann himself: John McCain and Sherwood Boehlert, for having the intellectual courage to break party lines and stand up for the scientists. The list of villains is too long and depressing to recount, and of course I decline to plug them in to the oxygen mask of publicity. Fasten your seatbelt before reading this, and lay in a supply of chestnuts to roast in front of the pyres the inquisitors seem no longer to be destined to use.
December 14, 2015
A few years back I made the mistake of engaging with a climate change denialist on social media. At first it seemed that I was simply debating another random user of the social media platform who happened to be misinformed of the reality of climate change.
However, it quickly became apparent that this user had a clear agenda of spreading misinformation, and was exceptionally well-prepared to deal with any evidence put in front of him. Doing a bit of sleuthing into his account it became reasonably apparent that this was one of many sock-puppet accounts being run by the same person, all of which were being used to spread disinformation across the social media site whenever climate change related topics appeared.
The amount of time invested by this one individual into creating an array of fake identities and using them to push climate denialist propaganda made me suspect that the person I was dealing with was probably a paid shill, operating on behalf of a larger denialist organisation.
Reflecting on the experience, it was very clear that by engaging with this person I was completely falling into the trap of the denialist machine. Their victory does not rely upon their being right, simply on their sowing seeds of doubt.
When debating people in an online forum (or anywhere really)you aren't actually trying to win over that person to your argument, you are trying to win over those who are viewing the debate. By providng this person with the opportunity to sow doubt at every piece of scientific evidence presented before him, I was simply allowing him to convince others that the science behind climate change isn't solid.
So, I began reading this book by Michael Mann with a very small but nonetheless illustrative experience of the efforts the denialist machine will go to create doubts and muddy the scientific consensus around climate change. To be honest, I wasn't sure how much I was going to get out of this book. I'm already pretty well versed on the science behind climate change, and have also read a fair bit about the efforts certain elements of society have gone to in order to create uncertainty about the validity of the science.
Nonetheless, I'm glad I read this book. Mann provides a very personal account of his experiences as a scientist on the front lines of the climate change debate. his accounts of some of the tactics used against him by the denialist industry are confronting to say the least. Reading about the campaign against him and his colleagues makes for some pretty depressing reading.
On the other side of the coin, Mann's discussion of the ways in which the scientific method and the peer review processes have helped move climate science forward were particularly interesting. As a non-scientist reading this book I was intrigued to see how areas of dispute or contention were identified within the climate science community and, in turn, explored and understood in more depth.
Overall, this book is a solid addition to the climate change literature that is already out there and the fact that Mann has created such a personal account helps distinguish it from other books that are available.
However, it quickly became apparent that this user had a clear agenda of spreading misinformation, and was exceptionally well-prepared to deal with any evidence put in front of him. Doing a bit of sleuthing into his account it became reasonably apparent that this was one of many sock-puppet accounts being run by the same person, all of which were being used to spread disinformation across the social media site whenever climate change related topics appeared.
The amount of time invested by this one individual into creating an array of fake identities and using them to push climate denialist propaganda made me suspect that the person I was dealing with was probably a paid shill, operating on behalf of a larger denialist organisation.
Reflecting on the experience, it was very clear that by engaging with this person I was completely falling into the trap of the denialist machine. Their victory does not rely upon their being right, simply on their sowing seeds of doubt.
When debating people in an online forum (or anywhere really)you aren't actually trying to win over that person to your argument, you are trying to win over those who are viewing the debate. By providng this person with the opportunity to sow doubt at every piece of scientific evidence presented before him, I was simply allowing him to convince others that the science behind climate change isn't solid.
So, I began reading this book by Michael Mann with a very small but nonetheless illustrative experience of the efforts the denialist machine will go to create doubts and muddy the scientific consensus around climate change. To be honest, I wasn't sure how much I was going to get out of this book. I'm already pretty well versed on the science behind climate change, and have also read a fair bit about the efforts certain elements of society have gone to in order to create uncertainty about the validity of the science.
Nonetheless, I'm glad I read this book. Mann provides a very personal account of his experiences as a scientist on the front lines of the climate change debate. his accounts of some of the tactics used against him by the denialist industry are confronting to say the least. Reading about the campaign against him and his colleagues makes for some pretty depressing reading.
On the other side of the coin, Mann's discussion of the ways in which the scientific method and the peer review processes have helped move climate science forward were particularly interesting. As a non-scientist reading this book I was intrigued to see how areas of dispute or contention were identified within the climate science community and, in turn, explored and understood in more depth.
Overall, this book is a solid addition to the climate change literature that is already out there and the fact that Mann has created such a personal account helps distinguish it from other books that are available.
March 20, 2012
Dr. Michael Mann is more than an exceptional scientist - he is a soldier for truth. Real science, as practiced by Dr. Mann, is like that. Only verifiable facts are left standing as survivors at the end of the battle. But, Mann is no pallid research scientist closeted in the laboratory. He is on the front lines, and taking fire from some of the most well armed forces ever arrayed against science: ideologues, those fearful their vested interests will be harmed by the truth of the science, think-tanks funded by the fossil fuel cabal and by those politicians who legislate with the intention of raising campaign dollars for their next office and currying favor, lugging the water, of well-healed funders who wish to keep us all confused and paralyzed.
The book is a riveting account of how one discovery came to symbolize the battle. Mann takes us inside the war, blow by blow. He names names. When you have finished Dr. Mann's book, you will know who the enemies of our children and grandchildren are. You may be shocked to find that the large portion of those who have tried to destroy what Dr. Mann and his colleagues have discovered (a finding supported by a dozen new investigations) are not scientists working in the field of climate change, but are often lawyers, politicians and foundations funded by special interests afraid of a paradigm shift. They are sowers of doubt, not fact. Every attemmpt to debunk the "hockey stick" has been found to be sloppy, erroneous and weak. Dozens of other separate and independent lines of investigation have shown what the hockey stick graphically portrays: that the earth has been on a warming trend over the period covered in the science. You will come to a fundamental conclusion that those people who deny human caused climate change cannot exist in the same plane of reality as science. No wonder they strike out at Mann and other scientists. What will take you by surprise is how dirty the opposition to science fights. How, when Mann's science can't be toppled, they turn to attempts to assassinate his character, to have him investigated, to be charged with fraud - to make him disappear.
Your impression of the scientist as a white coat, a nerd, a loner, will be forever changed by this book. Dr. Michael Mann is a fighter, and our grandchildren will read of him in school, as we read as schoolchildren the heroics of the Greatest Generation. The book is inspiring. Dr. Mann is an inspiration.
The book is a riveting account of how one discovery came to symbolize the battle. Mann takes us inside the war, blow by blow. He names names. When you have finished Dr. Mann's book, you will know who the enemies of our children and grandchildren are. You may be shocked to find that the large portion of those who have tried to destroy what Dr. Mann and his colleagues have discovered (a finding supported by a dozen new investigations) are not scientists working in the field of climate change, but are often lawyers, politicians and foundations funded by special interests afraid of a paradigm shift. They are sowers of doubt, not fact. Every attemmpt to debunk the "hockey stick" has been found to be sloppy, erroneous and weak. Dozens of other separate and independent lines of investigation have shown what the hockey stick graphically portrays: that the earth has been on a warming trend over the period covered in the science. You will come to a fundamental conclusion that those people who deny human caused climate change cannot exist in the same plane of reality as science. No wonder they strike out at Mann and other scientists. What will take you by surprise is how dirty the opposition to science fights. How, when Mann's science can't be toppled, they turn to attempts to assassinate his character, to have him investigated, to be charged with fraud - to make him disappear.
Your impression of the scientist as a white coat, a nerd, a loner, will be forever changed by this book. Dr. Michael Mann is a fighter, and our grandchildren will read of him in school, as we read as schoolchildren the heroics of the Greatest Generation. The book is inspiring. Dr. Mann is an inspiration.
September 18, 2012
Most of us have heard the apparent debate about global warming. But if you stop and actually take the time to read closely and actually study the information coming from climatologists who've actually conducted the scientific studies (over a dozen now) on global warming, you realize there really isn't a debate. Human caused global warming is a reality. The scientific community has reached a consensus. The real questions ought to be about how we go about mitigating the problem. It's a global problem that will require a global effort. It's a big challenge. It requires a major shift in energy policy away from fossil fuel to green energy solutions. But change at this level threatens the old order of things. And there are powerful vested interests in the status quo. Powerful vested interests usually don't cooperate or change peacefully. And so the "Climate Wars" began and Dr. Mann found himself in the front trenches.
In Dr. Mann's new book he tells how he ended up as a major figure in the climate wars and how he became a big target of the well funded global warming denial industry. He does a great job of laying out the science of global warming for the layman. He does an excellent job of refuting the arguments of deniers and contrarians. But I personally think his book's greatest contribution is to confirm our faith in science. Science is a process. A careful process carried out by disinterested scientists trying to, yes, "discern" (inside joke if you've read the book) the riddles of nature. Dr. Mann's book is an education in how science works and how the scientific community reached its consensus on global warming. This book is a must read for anyone with an interest in climate change, scientific inquiry, or how politics can cripple a societies response to a cataclysmic threat.
I highly recommend Dr. Mann's new book. You get a good memoir and an education along the way.
In Dr. Mann's new book he tells how he ended up as a major figure in the climate wars and how he became a big target of the well funded global warming denial industry. He does a great job of laying out the science of global warming for the layman. He does an excellent job of refuting the arguments of deniers and contrarians. But I personally think his book's greatest contribution is to confirm our faith in science. Science is a process. A careful process carried out by disinterested scientists trying to, yes, "discern" (inside joke if you've read the book) the riddles of nature. Dr. Mann's book is an education in how science works and how the scientific community reached its consensus on global warming. This book is a must read for anyone with an interest in climate change, scientific inquiry, or how politics can cripple a societies response to a cataclysmic threat.
I highly recommend Dr. Mann's new book. You get a good memoir and an education along the way.
March 20, 2016
A rather long and boring book defending the infamous hockey stick of global warming fame. It does a poor job of informing on the real issues in the debate about Anthropogenic Global Warming (AWG). Most of the book is spent disparaging AWG skeptics who are disrespectfully referred to as deniers. Early in the book (page 17) the author states "by the mid-1990s there was no longer reason for real scientific debate over the proposition that humans had warmed the planet and changed the climate... What scientists were still debating with each other at scientific meetings and in the professional journals was the precise balance of human versus natural causes observed thus far, and just what further changes might loom in our future." But from that point on the book relates a story that is less an honest debate than a indictment of one side of the proposition as completely wrong and his side as the exclusive owners of the truth.
As an engineer, I have been alarmed by the pronouncements of the left-wing politicians and activists that "the science is settled". Science is never settled anymore than politics is ever settled.
If you want to learn about the technical issues of climate change, read The Great Global Warming Blunder, How Mother Nature Fooled the World's Top Climate Scientists by Roy W. Spencer and Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science by Ian Plimer. If you want to understand the big picture from a scientist that is neither a proponent or skeptic, read The Whole Story of Climate, What Science Reveals about the Nature of Endless Change by E. Kirsten Peters. If you want to know the possible downside of the proposed actions to combat climate change, read The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels by Alex J. Epstein If you want to know the story behind why the left has so aggressively embraced AGW, read Watermelons: The Green Movements True Colors by James Delingpole.
As an engineer, I have been alarmed by the pronouncements of the left-wing politicians and activists that "the science is settled". Science is never settled anymore than politics is ever settled.
If you want to learn about the technical issues of climate change, read The Great Global Warming Blunder, How Mother Nature Fooled the World's Top Climate Scientists by Roy W. Spencer and Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science by Ian Plimer. If you want to understand the big picture from a scientist that is neither a proponent or skeptic, read The Whole Story of Climate, What Science Reveals about the Nature of Endless Change by E. Kirsten Peters. If you want to know the possible downside of the proposed actions to combat climate change, read The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels by Alex J. Epstein If you want to know the story behind why the left has so aggressively embraced AGW, read Watermelons: The Green Movements True Colors by James Delingpole.
July 25, 2012
An account by one of America's leading climate scientists from the middle of the climate wars. This is a man whose scientific findings have gotten him into all kinds of trouble with people who cannot stand the truth. He was dragged in front of a hostile Senate committee along with two of his greatest detractors. He was sent an envelope filled with mysterious white powder. A dead rat was left on his doorstep in the middle of the night. 10 years of his email was stolen from a server in England, and snippets were quoted extensively out of context in the mainstream media. He got into the middle of a fight between the nutty attorney general of the State of Virginia and the University of Virginia over his work product.
What he has had to go through is frightening. Even if someone does not like or disagrees with his findings, there is no need to treat him this way. The opposition has been organized and funded by the usual right wing crazies, the Koch Brothers, Exxon Mobil, the Scaife foundation, Faux News, the Wall Street Journal, etc. The lengths these people will go to to silence those whose views they do not like is creepy. Thank goodness people like Dr. Mann have had the courage to stand up for what they know to be the truth.
What he has had to go through is frightening. Even if someone does not like or disagrees with his findings, there is no need to treat him this way. The opposition has been organized and funded by the usual right wing crazies, the Koch Brothers, Exxon Mobil, the Scaife foundation, Faux News, the Wall Street Journal, etc. The lengths these people will go to to silence those whose views they do not like is creepy. Thank goodness people like Dr. Mann have had the courage to stand up for what they know to be the truth.
June 23, 2012
I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that as more information becomes available to more people, groups with an agenda employ spin and obfuscation to muddle public thinking. As the stakes get higher, however, one would imagine that in a democratic society some sort of social responsibility would take over and all parts of the political spectrum would realize that the issue at hand was too important to confuse the public about. This book outlines, in excruciating detail (and some science I don't fully understand), the efforts of who I will call 'reality deniers' to engineer a disinformation campaign about manmade global climate change. Let's just say that I'm glad I was taking my blood pressure meds religiously while reading this...
August 24, 2012
Although this book had interesting parts, they were very spread out. The book mostly discussed the graphing techniques and statistics used to generate the Hockey Stick Graphic demonstrating a large increase in the Earth's average temperatures during the last decades. Environmental effects caused by increased average temperatures were not really discussed. The book also advertizes that it's about the political disputes caused by the publication of the graph. It does mention this, normally in the context of what happened to the author (the author of the book was actually one of the scientists who developed the graph); however, even this seems to take a back-seat to the statistics and graphing techniques.
November 18, 2012
An important book that documents one of the most serious assaults on science in our lifetimes, with consequences that could affect human history for centuries or more. The book does such a careful job of documenting the lies, disinformation, threats, and ill will of the fossil fuel industry that I cannot imagine anyone who's read it continuing to describe global warming as a "hoax," the ludicrous claim made by Senator James Inhofe. Unfortunately, such careful and exhaustive documentation of the other side's dirty tricks sometimes makes the book a bit of a slog. Overall, though, it's well-written and, more importantly, fights the good fight and attacks ignorance and deceit with erudition. Every American should read it, including Senator Inhofe.
July 4, 2016
Although he made many good points and adequately refuted _The Hockeystick Illusion_, he tended toward dismissiveness. I understand this tendency of scientists toward crackpots and deniers, but since he was writing for a general audience, I thought it inappropriate.
Once one gets past his attitude, he provides a decent history of climate change controversy, denial, and skepticism.
I do recommend this book to anyone interested in understanding the hockeystick, the science behind it, the nature of the opposition to climate science that has demonstrated the basis of the theory of anthropogenic global warming.
Once one gets past his attitude, he provides a decent history of climate change controversy, denial, and skepticism.
I do recommend this book to anyone interested in understanding the hockeystick, the science behind it, the nature of the opposition to climate science that has demonstrated the basis of the theory of anthropogenic global warming.
June 19, 2019
Mann chronicles his and other scientists’ ongoing battle with the evil and destructive forces of climate change denial. In embarrassing detail.
More than anything, I hold a profound admiration for his ability to continue his state-of-the-art research efforts while fighting off countless cases of slander, harrassment and threats to his credibility and livelihood.
Supremely documented!
More than anything, I hold a profound admiration for his ability to continue his state-of-the-art research efforts while fighting off countless cases of slander, harrassment and threats to his credibility and livelihood.
Supremely documented!
June 25, 2018
Mann created the best narrative he could have out of a very dry topic - scientific debates and climate deniers climate denying. Some of it is totally riveting; some of it is a little too in the weeds of the science (but I did also learn new things, which was encouraging!)
Read
June 28, 2012going to read it soon
December 12, 2018
I wish I liked Michael Mann better. He's emerged as one of the most prominent spokespeople for the scientific community about climate change, which is the most pressing issue of our time by a wide margin, other than maybe nuclear proliferation. I have a great amount of admiration for his work, but I have to admit that there is something personally about him that turns me off. I had to unfollow him on twitter because of his relentless retweeting of fawning, aggrandizing tweets.
This book is more about the trials of Michael Mann than it is about the real meaning of climate change. It pains me to say that, because I am loathe to downplay any book committed to positive change in this area, and exploring the history of the "climate denial" movement is an important part of understanding how we got to where we are.
Mann is one of the scientists who authored landmark articles in 1998 and 1999 demonstrating the historical spike in temperatures in the modern era. The "hockey stick" shape of the graph is what is being referred to in the title. Most of the book is dedicated to the story of Mann's academic career, including the publishing of those two important articles, as well as the fallout of the articles that occurs over the next decade or so. We delve pretty deeply into the minutia of scientific debate, and Mann describes some technical aspects of the internecine debate about the particulars of climate change.
I did enjoy reading about how IPCC papers are written and edited. This was possibly the most valuable part of the book for me, since these papers are so integral to the ways that governments respond to the climate crisis.
Overall though, the book is not exactly uninteresting, but it never really links its story to the larger challenges. The climax of the climate story is hardly Michael Mann's testimony in front of a Congressional committee, personally significant though it may be to him. This project feels strangely ego-driven to me, which strikes me as inappropriate given the enormous consequences of climate change to each and every one of us, and to our entire society and planet.
This book is more about the trials of Michael Mann than it is about the real meaning of climate change. It pains me to say that, because I am loathe to downplay any book committed to positive change in this area, and exploring the history of the "climate denial" movement is an important part of understanding how we got to where we are.
Mann is one of the scientists who authored landmark articles in 1998 and 1999 demonstrating the historical spike in temperatures in the modern era. The "hockey stick" shape of the graph is what is being referred to in the title. Most of the book is dedicated to the story of Mann's academic career, including the publishing of those two important articles, as well as the fallout of the articles that occurs over the next decade or so. We delve pretty deeply into the minutia of scientific debate, and Mann describes some technical aspects of the internecine debate about the particulars of climate change.
I did enjoy reading about how IPCC papers are written and edited. This was possibly the most valuable part of the book for me, since these papers are so integral to the ways that governments respond to the climate crisis.
Overall though, the book is not exactly uninteresting, but it never really links its story to the larger challenges. The climax of the climate story is hardly Michael Mann's testimony in front of a Congressional committee, personally significant though it may be to him. This project feels strangely ego-driven to me, which strikes me as inappropriate given the enormous consequences of climate change to each and every one of us, and to our entire society and planet.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 78 reviews