Lukewarming: The New Climate Science that Changes Everything

by Patrick J. Michaels, Paul C Knappenberger

When it comes to global warming, most people think there are two “alarmist” or “denier” being their respective pejoratives. Either you acknowledge the existence of manmade climate change and consider it a dire global threat, or you deny it exists at all. But there's a third the “lukewarmers.” In The New Climate Science that Changes Everything , Cato scholars Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenberger explain the real science and spin behind the headlines and come to a provocative global warming is not hot―it's lukewarm. While that may not sound massive, it does, as the book's subtitle notes, change everything. Climate change is real, it is partially man-made, but it is clearer than ever that its impact has been exaggerated―with many of the headline-grabbing predictions now being rendered implausible or impossible. This new paperback edition of the book is a revised and expanded edition of last year's ebook-only edition of Lukewarming. This new edition includes updates in science and policy following the accords reached at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris. It is an equally perfect book for those looking for an introduction to the climate debate, or veterans seeking the freshest science.

Genres: Science, Climate Change, Nonfiction, Environment, Politics

250 pages, Paperback

Published October 7, 2016

Reviews

[Jane · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an extremely readable, well-researched and documented look at the current state of climate science and the politics surrounding it. Because of all of the charts and graphs and pieces of information, I had to read it in chunks to digest the information thoroughly, but I highly recommend it to anyone who wants a better understanding of what is true and what is hype.

[Russ · Rating 5 out of 5]

The politics of climate change might be settled but the science isn't, at least not in my lifetime. Climate change supporters split the world in binary terms between themselves as on the right side of history and everyone else as deniers. The authors provide a scientifically supported third way. They provide overwhelming evidence that while our climate has warmed in recent decades, it hasn't been catastrophic and it is near impossible to determine the manmade impact on the warming. Further, the solutions set by the IPCC don't solve anything and would do irreparable harm to developed economies. Instead, the money could be better spent on other things and we would adapt to the climate change.

This is not a book for true believers as your minds are already made up. It is a book for anyone who believes in the scientific method.

[Jim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good book describing real science explaining what we know about climate, and we don't know a lot.

[Roy Murry · Rating 5 out of 5]

LUKEWARMING
The New Climate Science
That Changes Everything

Patrick J. Micheals
and
Paul C. Knappenberger

Reviewed by Roy Murry, Author

I have listened to Main Stream Media and heard many debates concerning Global Warming over the last fifty years. And when President Donald J. Trump pulled us out of the Paris Accord, I started to think about it again. Was he right in doing so?

LUKEWARMING came up in an interview. If you hated President Trump, like many, you would call him and others "deniers" and pay up accordingly to an agreement, not a treaty that President Obama signed because he could not pass it through Congress.

The wording of the original document was President Obama's dilemma. He signed another executive order in essence. Hail to the Chief.

The two scientists from the CATO Institute who penned LUKEWARMING, in so many words debunk the notion that the world is in danger of over warming to the point of the coastal lost in Florida (a 1989 prediction by Al Gore and others) and other HOT predictions. They write their truth about those government paid prognosticators whose "Sky is falling" ideas brought the craziest surrounding their predictions.

Using mathematical and logical comparisons, these CATO scientists present a simple understanding of what is happening to the earth that an individual like myself can understand. You will find too.

Cut to the chase: President Trump is right as these scientists suggested before him taking office - the Paris Accords would hurt only the USA and the EU. The rest of the world would receive funds for the wrong reasons.

Easy to read, with short paragraphs and uncomplicated descriptions of their observations. The read is worth the price, but it should be free so people could know the truth.

[JP · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is written as a series of about forty short essays critiquing various aspects of the climate debate. The overall message is that where the situation exists at all, it's not as dire as the often extremist activists claim. Most of the essays include charts and graphs, often from the models used to claim predictions of warming. And there are plenty of source citations for anyone who wants to research more. If there's one trend that sticks with me, it's that the most extreme environmental pundits tend to make grand claims that are too soon proven wrong.

[Ted Gurley · Rating 5 out of 5]

A Primer on Climate

Michaels & Knappenburger give the reader an overview of the facts and fiction of climate change and man’s part. An unbiased look at the research on climate and man-made change. Spoiler-research does not support the hysteria we hear from media, the UN, and those who are cashing in on the business of climate change.

[Mark Harker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Best science book I have read on the real story of climate lchange

As an Engineer I like data and mathematical models. This book is heavy on both. It really shows the hysteria, politics and alarmism behind the current climate change discussion.

[Daniel Wolfred · Rating 4 out of 5]

Climate Science Not Settled

A good view that climate is and has changed but not settled on man made co2 as the main cause. Drills into the challenges with climate change to expose myths and truths.

[Marty Jones · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is junk, written by a guy who once claimed this:

Starting with 1998, there will almost certainly be a statistically significant cooling trend in the decade ending in 2007.

(That didn't happen, in case you were wondering)

[Rudy Duttry · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very good read.

This shows the Apocalypse is not around the corner and that once again governments can not be trusted to do what's right.

[Keenan Johnston · Rating 4 out of 5]

Comprehensive overview of the politics of global warming with actual data. For anyone who wants to be educated on the global warming debate, this is a great place to start.

[Murray · Rating 4 out of 5]

My full review is pending some research I need to do about the conclusions of the book. However it is well worth reading,

[Dorian Pacheco · Rating 4 out of 5]

Challenges the commonly accepted information about climate change. Not the best in terms of readability but still managed to get its point across.

[Cindy · Rating 4 out of 5]

These two climate scientists bring science (not hyperbole) back to the discussion. They explain where the climate Cassandras go wrong. They call themselves and other scientists like them "Lukewarmers" hence the title. Unfortunately, leftists who want a socialist future have changed the whole issue of climate into a religion instead of science. The research money goes to those who can create the biggest hype. Remember the 70s when we were all going to die because of the coming ice age. Hysteria doesn't belong in this discussion. Yes, climate changes...always has..and yes, humans are having a miniscule impact but the radical left is selling a completely distorted view of the issue.

[John Cooley · Rating 1 out of 5]

Defective printing. Blank pages, missing graphs. Don,t buy.

More attention to display on electronic media required. Text continually refers to non existent graphs and last page. Is missing from each chapter.

[Kelsey Breseman · Rating 1 out of 5]

I tried to read this, but it made me so upset I had to walk away.
The problem is, if you haven't already developed familiarity in the space, this sounds like convincing new science. The authors have carefully presented it as such.
But the "new" science they present is not in fact new– for example, there is a Univerity of Queensland edX course older than the publication date of this book which offers effective debunkings of the "new science" (old myths relabeled without newly convincing data) they present.

I'd like to believe that climate change isn't a big deal. I opened this book consciously openminded. But I felt like my trust was betrayed when these authors trotted out old myths and labeled them new (not even "new again" but as though these were novel insights).

[Gerald R. Stein]

For anyone who is interested in a data basis for the subject of climate change rather than and arm waving basis, this is a must read.