The Satanic Gases: Clearing the Air about Global Warming
The Satanic Gases: Clearing the Air about Global Warming – Review
At the outset, I have been a global-warming-as-disaster agnostic. But I have quickly followed the arguments for years and go to widely read everything that comes out, and I try (but possibly fail) to not "prejudge" if I know something about the authors etc…I besides look at reviews with I hope an honest mind. That brings me to The Satanic Gases. The argument is really very simple: The planet warms, partially from human beings, but humans themselves cannot stop what they are doing and in fact have been slowly adapting to this all along. But great scenarios follow play from a political process that only funds our most vicarious problems and a media that lives to sell media (surprise!). In fact, though, future warming is likely to be near the short side of the range, unless almost all logical models are wrong to the core. This argument is usually made in very influential fashion in this book. What amazes me is that it seems you also agree with these guys, citing the obvious plethora of facts and figures in the book, or you disagree and attack personally. This itself bumps my study of this book up one star. But, more important–and I hope I am not wrong here–it’s starting to look further and more like Michaels and Balling were in fact the correct prophets about the ultimate (non)-resolution of this issue. They have been literally screaming this from every available mountaintop (some supplied by industry, others from their University positions–major institutions like ASU and Virginia don’t hand out Full Professor from cracker jack boxes) for years now. I give this book 4.5 stars (rounded to 5)as a result. More evidence: A few months ago Nova/Frontline had a global warming show in which the entire second hour was gave (without credit) to precisely Michaels’ and Balling’s proposition: you can’t stop it, and you can’t even slow it much, so why try? The July Atlantic Monthly is even further telling. A massive piece by Daniel Sarewitz and Roger Pielke concludes 1)The science will never adequately support policy, and 2) We can’t do much about it anyway, and 3) We have specially adapted if we have enough money, so maybe we ought to help impoverished countries with infrastructure. Pielke was a Democratic staffer for the late (of Southern California) congressman Brown’s Science committee. Hey, those are the same arguments Michaels and Balling make in Satanic Gases, only based upon peaks of data. It’s rare to see (what I commonly used to think) were caterwauling naysayers turn out right, but I am very close to eventually moving off the agnostic fence as a effect of The Satanic Gases. It probably doesn’t hurt that the book is very well written–I have seen in regional papers several Op-Eds by Michaels and he is a very hot, considering writer for a scientist, almost like the "Anti-Sagan".