What do you think?
Rate this book
Climategate: A Veteran Meteorologist Exposes the Global Warming Scam
Those now notorious intercepted emails documenting leading scientists conspiring to squelch global-warming skeptics and falsifying data proved exactly what Brian Sussman has been saying for years. Climategate is intended for anyone who has ever expressed skepticism about the clamorous environmentalist claims that the Earth is in peril because of mankind's appetite for carbon-based fuels.By tracing the origins of the current climate scare, Sussman guides the reader from the diabolical minds of Marx and Engles in the 1800s, to the global governance machinations of the United Nations today. Climategate is a call to action, warning Americans that their future is being undermined by a phony pseudo-science aimed at altering and dominating every aspect of life in the United States and the world.
240 pages, Hardcover
First published April 22, 2010
32 people are currently reading
133 people want to read
About the author
Brian Sussman
6 books7 followersBrian Jay Sussman (born April 3, 1956) is an American conservative talk radio host and former meteorologist in the San Francisco Bay area. He currently hosts the Morning Show on radio station KSFO.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
August 1, 2010
Cimategate showed how not necessarily "wrong" data was used but how "specific data" was kept from other scientists and "not" used when formulating final theories. So the big question is did Dr. Mann use faulty data or incorrect data to tailor make his theory to fall into a designated popular political agenda? Here is an example of a scientist leaning towards a specified agenda:
[W:]e need to get some broad based support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have." *Stanford Climatologist Stephen Schneider, author of Global Warming; Interview with Stephen Schneider, Discover Magazine, October 1989*
So, did Dr. Mann falsify data? No he did not. What Dr. Mann did do was "leave out" essential data that would have caused many in the scientific field to have more questions. I know that Penn State did a review of his research methods, (not his scientific data), and he was cleared 3 out of 4 questions. The review panel consisted of 3 people who asked 4 questions; (personally, I don’t consider this an investigation; I was questioned longer and harder when my dog bit someone), so I don't know how deep an investigation was done.
So, am I denying climate change? No! To deny climate change would be like denying the sunrise, it is a planetary fact backed up by solid geological research; climate change is a part of our planet’s evolution and continues to be so. But to put all human resources, monies and commit a countries total economy to the science of climate change would be just as idiotic.
Regardless of where an individual stands on this issue; this book brings forward a few important reminders to everyone; always, always question!
“The fallibility of methods is a valuable reminder of the importance of skepticism in science. Scientific knowledge and scientific methods, whether old or new, must be continually scrutinized for possible errors. Such skepticism can conflict with other important features of science, such as the need for creativity and for conviction in arguing a given position. * “On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research” – National Academy of Science, 1995*
Even when "Notable Scientists" come down from the mount with the words of "scientific date" written in stone......still question!
[W:]e need to get some broad based support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have." *Stanford Climatologist Stephen Schneider, author of Global Warming; Interview with Stephen Schneider, Discover Magazine, October 1989*
So, did Dr. Mann falsify data? No he did not. What Dr. Mann did do was "leave out" essential data that would have caused many in the scientific field to have more questions. I know that Penn State did a review of his research methods, (not his scientific data), and he was cleared 3 out of 4 questions. The review panel consisted of 3 people who asked 4 questions; (personally, I don’t consider this an investigation; I was questioned longer and harder when my dog bit someone), so I don't know how deep an investigation was done.
So, am I denying climate change? No! To deny climate change would be like denying the sunrise, it is a planetary fact backed up by solid geological research; climate change is a part of our planet’s evolution and continues to be so. But to put all human resources, monies and commit a countries total economy to the science of climate change would be just as idiotic.
Regardless of where an individual stands on this issue; this book brings forward a few important reminders to everyone; always, always question!
“The fallibility of methods is a valuable reminder of the importance of skepticism in science. Scientific knowledge and scientific methods, whether old or new, must be continually scrutinized for possible errors. Such skepticism can conflict with other important features of science, such as the need for creativity and for conviction in arguing a given position. * “On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research” – National Academy of Science, 1995*
Even when "Notable Scientists" come down from the mount with the words of "scientific date" written in stone......still question!
August 7, 2010
This heavily documented book makes Al Gore's AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH read like comedy. It's no spoiler to reveal that the cause of global warming is. . . ta da. . . the sun! Read this book for certainty about climate change/global warming today, yesterday, and centuries ago, plus the current environmental politics creating even more disaster in developing countries.
January 12, 2013
Although Climategate contains some good information, it is immature, disorganized, and generally alarmist propaganda. If you are looking for a clean, factual book representing a skeptical or oppositional view on the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis and the debate and politics surrounding it, look elsewhere.
Sussman is stuck in the fifties, claiming not only that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is incorrect, but that it is actually an elaborate communist plot. Anyone supporting the AGW hypothesis is essentially labeled a communist and discredited by whatever means possible while those opposing the AGW hypothesis are highly praised and described as good, patriotic American heroes with very little grey area between the two categories.
Sussman does not present his views in a straight-forward, factual way that is easy to read and retain. Rather, solid bits of information presented throughout the work are lost among a sea of disgusting name-calling, egotistical personal anecdotes, and spontaneous history and science lessons. The writing is meandering and Sussman tends to jump about between subtopics.
Overall, the writing is fiery, but the content is completely diluted.
March 14, 2015
Good read, very compelling evidence presented against the theory of climate change -- or I should say, MAN CAUSED climate change/global warming. This book definitely has an ideological bent in its presentation but I'm not sure if the conversation of global warming / climate change can be presented without one. It is pretty stunning how polarized this debate has become and also how much MONEY is out there to be made (or has already been made) promoting man-made global warming. It does, or at least should, make you stop and wonder what the motivations are for folks pushing this agenda. Whatever side of this argument you come down on, this book will challenge you and force you to decide which set of facts you believe. Don't just blindly trust what anyone else says -- learn for yourself.
April 1, 2017
A truly excellent analysis of the climate change hoax. This is a must read for understanding how the climate changes, but not due to human involvement. Also discussed are the deceptive ways in which anthropogenic climate change is promoted, researched and often forced upon individuals. This book will help arm the reader to battle the global warming scam, and reveal the ultimate goal of those who invented the climate change hoax. I very highly recommend this book - it's a must read. Truly exceptional!
April 25, 2012
Very well written. One of the best and most researched books with every claim verified. Easy to understand.
September 30, 2013
Climategate ends on these words from the author’s “Deapthroat” character “Dave.”
‘Sussman, I was trained by the US military to be a warrior. I won’t stop trying to save this country, and neither will you,’ he soberly charged me.
I silently shook my head in agreement with my friend. He leaned forward across the table.
‘That’s why I want this book to be a huge seller.’
So, does Brian Sussman offer the public other ways to understand global warming and CO2 emissions? Does he captivate the public or uncover some great misuse of power the way Bernstein and Woodward do in “All the President’s Men?”
Brian Sussman is at his best when speaking as a professional weatherman. He uses his knowledge to talk about earth’s climate history and how variables such as the wobble in earth’s rotation, its current distance from the sun, and how sun flares cause different weather patterns and climate conditions. When talking about one of man’s favorite jokes, “the five day forecast,” Sussman openly admits with candor and humor its unpredictability.
Sussman attacks the C02 research using his weatherman’s experience. He debates that CO2 has minimal effect on our climate because it is such a small part of our atmosphere, 0.035%. He then admits that humans have affected 30% of that 0.035%, or 0.0105%. He also dislikes computer model research because it is similar to the” five day forecast.” – If you think we can’t get it right in five days, why do you believe we can predict longer periods?
Sussman is not able to achieve the distinction that Bernstein and Woodward receive when they published “All the President’s Men.”” Climategate” reads more like the Jerry Springer television script than a book on climate, politics, or betrayal. It assaults ones character by calling certain individuals who think unlike the author’s as “elitists” and it vilifies Stanford University and liberal arts education because –one assumes- they don’t have the same values as the author’s. “Climategate“ like “All the President’s Men,” has a political antagonist. In “Climategate” it is Al Gore, who is born into wealth, has a long term business relationship with the socialist Armand Hammer, and who happens to be heavily involved in oil and coal companies – businesses that Gore appears to make a great deal of money in while criticizing.
So did Sussman accomplish Dave’s objectives? I’m afraid not and I believe it is because the author reached out to a select group. He did not think about those in the middle, or the educated “elitists,” Saying this, I do believe it is worth reading because Sussman still brings out some excellent points,
‘Sussman, I was trained by the US military to be a warrior. I won’t stop trying to save this country, and neither will you,’ he soberly charged me.
I silently shook my head in agreement with my friend. He leaned forward across the table.
‘That’s why I want this book to be a huge seller.’
So, does Brian Sussman offer the public other ways to understand global warming and CO2 emissions? Does he captivate the public or uncover some great misuse of power the way Bernstein and Woodward do in “All the President’s Men?”
Brian Sussman is at his best when speaking as a professional weatherman. He uses his knowledge to talk about earth’s climate history and how variables such as the wobble in earth’s rotation, its current distance from the sun, and how sun flares cause different weather patterns and climate conditions. When talking about one of man’s favorite jokes, “the five day forecast,” Sussman openly admits with candor and humor its unpredictability.
Sussman attacks the C02 research using his weatherman’s experience. He debates that CO2 has minimal effect on our climate because it is such a small part of our atmosphere, 0.035%. He then admits that humans have affected 30% of that 0.035%, or 0.0105%. He also dislikes computer model research because it is similar to the” five day forecast.” – If you think we can’t get it right in five days, why do you believe we can predict longer periods?
Sussman is not able to achieve the distinction that Bernstein and Woodward receive when they published “All the President’s Men.”” Climategate” reads more like the Jerry Springer television script than a book on climate, politics, or betrayal. It assaults ones character by calling certain individuals who think unlike the author’s as “elitists” and it vilifies Stanford University and liberal arts education because –one assumes- they don’t have the same values as the author’s. “Climategate“ like “All the President’s Men,” has a political antagonist. In “Climategate” it is Al Gore, who is born into wealth, has a long term business relationship with the socialist Armand Hammer, and who happens to be heavily involved in oil and coal companies – businesses that Gore appears to make a great deal of money in while criticizing.
So did Sussman accomplish Dave’s objectives? I’m afraid not and I believe it is because the author reached out to a select group. He did not think about those in the middle, or the educated “elitists,” Saying this, I do believe it is worth reading because Sussman still brings out some excellent points,
January 21, 2016
More treachery afoot.
An extremely insightful book on the politicization of the global warming event coupled with facts. Sussman offers that global warming is being perpetuated by players and forces who want to pass socialism and social welfare policies through our government thus destroying the principles of the United States. What global warming advocates do is omit facts and skew results to con the masses of incoming doom.
Liberals say that Republicans play on people fears. Talk about the most heinous projection when the peddle the false assertion of anthropogenic global warming.
An extremely insightful book on the politicization of the global warming event coupled with facts. Sussman offers that global warming is being perpetuated by players and forces who want to pass socialism and social welfare policies through our government thus destroying the principles of the United States. What global warming advocates do is omit facts and skew results to con the masses of incoming doom.
Liberals say that Republicans play on people fears. Talk about the most heinous projection when the peddle the false assertion of anthropogenic global warming.
May 31, 2012
Excellent. Brian Sussman is a science reporter and a meteorologist from the SF Bay area. In this book he debunks global warming/climate change. He begins with a historical perspective of how we got to where we are now and ends with what is really behind the fraud. He presents facts to support his claims with references that can be verified. A must read.
May 20, 2016
Sussman makes some very good points when it comes to the science of climate change that essentially amount to: the climate is VERY complicated and pinpointing any warming trends entirely on CO2 or even on Methane gas is simplistic. I've read many of the same points however in news articles that were only 4 or 5 printed pages in length (the Economist magazine had an excellent article on global warming several weeks ago). Sussman takes those points and inflates them into a full length book by spinning a national conspiracy between left-wing politicians, environmentalists and non-oil big business. Frankly, I got a little tired of the name calling (environmentalists are somehow both Marxists and Nazis) and the doomsday rhetoric. It's no wonder that our current political climate is as toxic as it is, if guys like Sussman can't make valid points without also mudslinging.
June 4, 2019
Very illuminating book. I was unaware of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age which would completely change the climate models if correctly factored in. I always thought the Global Warming issue was about fear and money, but I had no idea to what extent. Now the language has changed to "Climate Crisis". What better words to instill fear and promote government control?
September 19, 2011
THIS IS MUST READ. Eye opening. Political book that is easy to read and understand
November 29, 2011
Excellent book that presents the facts regarding the Global warming issue. The book is simple for the non scientist to read and understand. I recommend it.
January 28, 2019
Outstanding Book
This book has a wealth of information and I’ve learned so much about our climate and the motives of those pushing the “Green” agenda.
This book has a wealth of information and I’ve learned so much about our climate and the motives of those pushing the “Green” agenda.
March 10, 2019
Eye-opening
August 30, 2020
Updated review: changed my rating from 3 to 2 stars, because there is much more quality skeptical literature available out there to read instead. Apocalypse Never is a much more mature and balanced look. The Skeptical Environmentalist is less accessible but also more worthy of your time.
The main points of this book:
1) The communist slant: human-made global warming is a conspiracy designed by communist sympathizer scientists and politicians.
2) The money and politics slant: Al Gore and others are primary interested in global warming because of the monetary advantages.
3) The control slant: any proposed changes to our lifestyle in response to global warming are attempts of the government to infringe on our liberty, and should be resisted.
4) Natural causes are the main force at work in temperature variations, and humans have no significant affect.
5) Many warnings are overly alarmist and sensationalized.
There are some good points to consider, such as the unfortunate involvement of money and politics. There's good reason to be suspicious of Al Gore and other politicians, but I think it can still be true that he and others genuinely care and believe in global warming.
Another interesting point is that plants thrive in a rich CO2 atmosphere, and that some time in the distant past (444 million years ago in the Late Ordovician era) the CO2 levels were perhaps 8 to 20 times current levels. The Earth itself apparently weathered it, but humans haven't ever been around to see those levels. Though it should be said that our current CO2 levels haven't been seen for 1,000,000 years, which seems bad to say the least (see Luthi, D., et al.. 2008; Etheridge, D.M., et al. 2010; Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record.). This is one of many points that should prompt further research.
The author is primarily a conservative talkshow host and not a publishing scientist, no matter how much he pushes his credentials as a "veteran meteorologist". Yet he still brings up interesting points about the fallibility of the scientific data which seem true, such as thermometers in cities skewed by the heat island effect or other bad placement. But in general, this book is not a great place to get an honest overview of the science, no matter how many sources he cites (like the Skeptical Environmentalist, the author purposefully doesn't reset the footnote number at the start of each chapter, so you can come away impressed with the total count by the end).
Unfortunately much of the cited science in the book seems to have been outdated by the time the book was published, and now that a decade has passed, even the most up to date science in the book is outdated or wrong. For instance, the author insists that the earth has actually started cooling, and with 20/20 hindsight in the year 2020, we now know this was a wrong guess.
Most distracting is the outright name-calling and unprofessional attitude throughout the book, which is some sensationalism of the author's own, brought in from his radio show I assume. Leaders of projects that seem to assert more control over our lives are called "czars", further pushing the communist conspiracy theory. People who believe in Anthropogenic Global Warming are labeled "global whiners". And several times in the book, Nancy Pelosi is referred to as "House Madam Pelosi", like she's a madam running a whorehouse. As far as I can tell, "Madam Speaker" is the proper title. Do a search for "House Madam" and the top results that show up are folks disparaging her in the forums on other conservative talk shows. This was all pretty juvenile.
In all, this is not a serious book that is worth your time, and I'd recommend looking elsewhere.
----------------
Previous review:
Even if you're not much of a global warming skeptic, there are some interesting things in here that are worthy of consideration.
Keep in mind this is very much targeted towards older conservative readers, the folks who would listen to a very conservative talk show, so there's a bit of theatrical elements carried over from that format. That being said, there are clearly some good points here and there, but unfortunately the author gets lost over his ongoing obsession with discrediting Al Gore (and a bit of Obama, who was in office when the book was written). To be fair, I think we should always be skeptical when politicians get involved with anything, especially these days, where now any issue can and will be politicized.
The main thesis of the book is that the author thinks global warming is a hoax largely propagated by communist sympathizers, which is really baffling at first. But then remember that this is really playing towards his target audience - older conservative folks whose ideal America is a post-WWII country on guard against communism and totalitarianism (the author recalls Hitler towards the end of the book even). I really don't see this connection, but here's the thing - even if some or all of AGW (anthropogenic global warming) proponents are communists, it can still be logically possible that AGW is real and is a threat.
Now in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, there are some interesting parallels to folks who refused to wear masks, claiming that it's the government's fingers reaching into people's lives, desperate to claim more control over them. Like them, the author of this book is so obsessed over a conspiracy that the government is illegitimately using some fake crisis or scare in order to gain more control over people's lives. I am afraid that like coronavirus, they will be shouting "conspiracy!" as the flames of the fire eventually engulf us all.
In the end, to me the author just felt like a caricature in the movie Dr. Strangelove, and his communist plot conspiracy casts a dark shadow on what could otherwise be common ground. But then again, there is no intent to create common ground. I am just not his target audience.
The main points of this book:
1) The communist slant: human-made global warming is a conspiracy designed by communist sympathizer scientists and politicians.
2) The money and politics slant: Al Gore and others are primary interested in global warming because of the monetary advantages.
3) The control slant: any proposed changes to our lifestyle in response to global warming are attempts of the government to infringe on our liberty, and should be resisted.
4) Natural causes are the main force at work in temperature variations, and humans have no significant affect.
5) Many warnings are overly alarmist and sensationalized.
There are some good points to consider, such as the unfortunate involvement of money and politics. There's good reason to be suspicious of Al Gore and other politicians, but I think it can still be true that he and others genuinely care and believe in global warming.
Another interesting point is that plants thrive in a rich CO2 atmosphere, and that some time in the distant past (444 million years ago in the Late Ordovician era) the CO2 levels were perhaps 8 to 20 times current levels. The Earth itself apparently weathered it, but humans haven't ever been around to see those levels. Though it should be said that our current CO2 levels haven't been seen for 1,000,000 years, which seems bad to say the least (see Luthi, D., et al.. 2008; Etheridge, D.M., et al. 2010; Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record.). This is one of many points that should prompt further research.
The author is primarily a conservative talkshow host and not a publishing scientist, no matter how much he pushes his credentials as a "veteran meteorologist". Yet he still brings up interesting points about the fallibility of the scientific data which seem true, such as thermometers in cities skewed by the heat island effect or other bad placement. But in general, this book is not a great place to get an honest overview of the science, no matter how many sources he cites (like the Skeptical Environmentalist, the author purposefully doesn't reset the footnote number at the start of each chapter, so you can come away impressed with the total count by the end).
Unfortunately much of the cited science in the book seems to have been outdated by the time the book was published, and now that a decade has passed, even the most up to date science in the book is outdated or wrong. For instance, the author insists that the earth has actually started cooling, and with 20/20 hindsight in the year 2020, we now know this was a wrong guess.
Most distracting is the outright name-calling and unprofessional attitude throughout the book, which is some sensationalism of the author's own, brought in from his radio show I assume. Leaders of projects that seem to assert more control over our lives are called "czars", further pushing the communist conspiracy theory. People who believe in Anthropogenic Global Warming are labeled "global whiners". And several times in the book, Nancy Pelosi is referred to as "House Madam Pelosi", like she's a madam running a whorehouse. As far as I can tell, "Madam Speaker" is the proper title. Do a search for "House Madam" and the top results that show up are folks disparaging her in the forums on other conservative talk shows. This was all pretty juvenile.
In all, this is not a serious book that is worth your time, and I'd recommend looking elsewhere.
----------------
Previous review:
Even if you're not much of a global warming skeptic, there are some interesting things in here that are worthy of consideration.
Keep in mind this is very much targeted towards older conservative readers, the folks who would listen to a very conservative talk show, so there's a bit of theatrical elements carried over from that format. That being said, there are clearly some good points here and there, but unfortunately the author gets lost over his ongoing obsession with discrediting Al Gore (and a bit of Obama, who was in office when the book was written). To be fair, I think we should always be skeptical when politicians get involved with anything, especially these days, where now any issue can and will be politicized.
The main thesis of the book is that the author thinks global warming is a hoax largely propagated by communist sympathizers, which is really baffling at first. But then remember that this is really playing towards his target audience - older conservative folks whose ideal America is a post-WWII country on guard against communism and totalitarianism (the author recalls Hitler towards the end of the book even). I really don't see this connection, but here's the thing - even if some or all of AGW (anthropogenic global warming) proponents are communists, it can still be logically possible that AGW is real and is a threat.
Now in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, there are some interesting parallels to folks who refused to wear masks, claiming that it's the government's fingers reaching into people's lives, desperate to claim more control over them. Like them, the author of this book is so obsessed over a conspiracy that the government is illegitimately using some fake crisis or scare in order to gain more control over people's lives. I am afraid that like coronavirus, they will be shouting "conspiracy!" as the flames of the fire eventually engulf us all.
In the end, to me the author just felt like a caricature in the movie Dr. Strangelove, and his communist plot conspiracy casts a dark shadow on what could otherwise be common ground. But then again, there is no intent to create common ground. I am just not his target audience.
February 17, 2022
While I did learn a few facts I didn't know before, this mean-spirited author cherry picks in a very deceiving way. The tragedy is that he steers people down the wrong path, and wants to live in the past. I would love to see what he has to say now, 10 years after his book was published, and how he justifies his position.
Those who already believe that climate change is either not occurring, or is not influenced by people, will love this book. Those who believe otherwise will be outraged.
I hated this book.
Those who already believe that climate change is either not occurring, or is not influenced by people, will love this book. Those who believe otherwise will be outraged.
I hated this book.
August 26, 2019
Excellent rebuttal to the politically driven climate change hysteria. Sussman is a meteorologist and a Christian. He is well versed in current events and politics, so is able to see through the false science and political motives driving this issue. Well worth your time, regardless of which side of the issue you fall on.
May 25, 2020
An easy to read overview of the subject.
August 9, 2022
Excellent, informative read. A necessary alternative to the fear-mongering Climate Change promoted by the accepted narrative.
January 3, 2013
Brian has done an amazing job of organizing a lot of data and FACTS - something the global warming crowd hates - and has rolled it into an easy to read, cohesive read. although a lot is not new to me, he added some fantastic additional information, quotes and data to review. It's hard to believe people are still running around claiming a global warming consensus. Well worth the time to read.
Currently reading
September 12, 2010Reading
January 12, 2011
This is an essential book to combat the lies of "global warming," "climate change," and the "green movement."
July 3, 2016
Must read
I doubt that this book will convince the religious supporters of climate change but it will increase the resolve of those who are sceptical
I doubt that this book will convince the religious supporters of climate change but it will increase the resolve of those who are sceptical
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews