Rating: 
Summary: These people are getting more expensive all the time.
Review:
Another excellent 'prediction book'.Well written and a good summary of the worst storms of the 1990's.These global warming experts are speculating a future of doom and gloom while trying to dress it up in a cloak of science.How else could they get the funding for their causes,studies,1500 person conferences,and so forth?All this to study something that is obvious.You've got to admit it though,they've created quite an industry for themselves.
There have always been earthquakes,pandemics,violent storms,droughts,wars,etc.,and there will be more in the future.One doesn't need to be a genius to figure that out.It would be a stroke of genius if someone were to scientifically predict the future,but so far that has been the great illusion.
However,reading these books has an entertainment value.Check out my reviews of "5/5/2000 ICE-The Ultimate Disaster,11 Jan 2005" and "The Future in Plain Sight" 9 Jan 2004.Then again,we all remember predictions for Y2K.
This book was published in 2001 while the terrorists were planning 9/11.Where was their prediction of that?Also,we just experienced the terrible tsunami in the Indian Ocean,--oops missed that one too.All right,let's be fair,that wasn't the game then.But haven't we seen some attempts to tie the tsunami into global warming?Good area for more studies and research and conferences!It was interesting seeing on page 237:
"The continued decline in water levels in the Nile could threaten political stability...the next was in the Middle East,according to Egyptian officials,may very well be over water." All the while,terrorism was running rampant now we have war in the Middle East,but not over water--again,not their game.
There is an adage that applies to this sort of thinking..
"If you take the generally accepted wisdom at the time,and
then take the totally opposite ,you'll probably
get closer to the truth."
The only thing that can be predicted for the future with
certainty is that the future will be unpredictible.Calling spectulation and prediction science doesn't change anything.
Once predictions get complicated and pushed off into the future,all bets are off.
Don't get me wrong,we all learned in school that some things
weer predictible;for instance:
"Pick on someone bigger than you-you're gonna get whupped."
Now that's cause and effect in its basic form.
It wasn't many years ago that the pundits were running around telling us about the population explosion and we'd all be running out of food.Now we hear that 70 percent are overweight and we just the opposite crisis on our hands.Isn' that what the adage was all about?
Nonetheless the book is worth reading.
Rating: 
Summary: Identity Crisis! What is the angle here, anyway?
Review: "The Coming Storm" by Bob Reiss discusses "extreme weather and our terrifying future." Now there's something to cast a gloomy shadow over your day. Reiss, formerly of the Chicago Tribune, writes 322 pages over an indeterminate number of chapters. Of the many hundreds of books I've read in the last year and a half, this is the only one--in my entire life, for that matter--that did not have a Table of Contents. What? I looked all over, but didn't see one--an inexcusable shortcoming in a nonfiction work. The title of itself is a slippery slope, totally unresearched hyperbole of how we're all going to die because of what we've done to the weather and the surrounding environment. Okay, so he's made a conclusion. But where are the footnotes? The endnotes? Any references or sources that we can check out? Nothing! I can't stand reading a nonfiction book without them. In fact, this is one of the very few that I've encountered that was composed in a strictly essaical, you've-got-to-believe-me-or-else undertone. Sorry, Bob. That's not good enough. What classification of book is this, anyway? Fiction? Nonfiction? The perspective is shifted so much, I don't know what to believe. The writing style is typical of some newspaper reports who lead you in with a few sentences, fragmented and not really saying anything, then draw you to the back of the paper which at least has a few specifics. Anything that we do as the result of our existence is easily compensated for by Mother Nature, as if we were able to outsmart her and the way she manages the atmosphere as the result of our ecological indifferences or shortcomings. I still haven't seen Reiss' final conclusion or what he's really trying to say. It must be buried in here somewhere, but I don't have the time to dig for it.
Rating:
Summary: Identity Crisis! What is the angle here, anyway?
Review: "The Coming Storm" by Bob Reiss discusses "extreme weather and our terrifying future." Now there's something to cast a gloomy shadow over your day. Reiss, formerly of the Chicago Tribune, writes 322 pages over an indeterminate number of chapters. Of the many hundreds of books I've read in the last year and a half, this is the only one--in my entire life, for that matter--that did not have a Table of Contents. What? I looked all over, but didn't see one--an inexcusable shortcoming in a nonfiction work. The title of itself is a slippery slope, totally unresearched hyperbole of how we're all going to die because of what we've done to the weather and the surrounding environment. Okay, so he's made a conclusion. But where are the footnotes? The endnotes? Any references or sources that we can check out? Nothing! I can't stand reading a nonfiction book without them. In fact, this is one of the very few that I've encountered that was composed in a strictly essaical, you've-got-to-believe-me-or-else undertone. Sorry, Bob. That's not good enough. What classification of book is this, anyway? Fiction? Nonfiction? The perspective is shifted so much, I don't know what to believe. The writing style is typical of some newspaper reports who lead you in with a few sentences, fragmented and not really saying anything, then draw you to the back of the paper which at least has a few specifics. Anything that we do as the result of our existence is easily compensated for by Mother Nature, as if we were able to outsmart her and the way she manages the atmosphere as the result of our ecological indifferences or shortcomings. I still haven't seen Reiss' final conclusion or what he's really trying to say. It must be buried in here somewhere, but I don't have the time to dig for it.
Rating:
Summary: Critically acclaimed book on human impact on climate
Review: Bob Reiss was and still is a reporter. The way he writes has a lot to do with that. Over the past few years there have been an incredible surge of non-fiction books written by reporters on natural phenomena and the impact of man (or the interference of man). Many of these books have been written by reporters, and they have been excellent. This is another book to add to the list.Like Reiss indicates there are many who have noticed strange weather patterns, and I am one of the many people who have noticed the changes in weather. Living in Western PA, we are on the very edge of the Tornado Alley, and we usually don't get a lot of tornadoes over the years, but we've had extremely strange weather. Droughts for three years, no snow when you can look at historical pictures of Pittsburgh having loads of snow (albeit dirty from the steel mills). The past few years have seen increases in what are called 'microbursts', which cannot be followed by any known means of radar. I am not a die-hard environmentalist. I am probably the most aware person who is geared that way in my family, because I love nature, forests, and the wonderful wildlife that goes with this. There are many things that this book is making me think about changing including making my house more energy efficient. This book is actually a very fast read for those who have an interest and training in biological and weather phenomena. It should also be required reading for those in politics. It's extremely scary the world we are leaving our kids and our grandkids, and we need to start as Americans to require our politicians to pay attention to global warming and the strange weather that goes with it. As it is, I vote for Bush Jr. this last time, but I am sorely inclined to vote against him because of the total lack of concern for the environment that he shows (as well as some other things). This book is also interesting in giving the readers an introduction into the way politics shapes national and international policy not only concerning global warming, but things like AIDS, relief for some countries and not others, etc. I get very, very tired of the input of politicians into areas that they know nothing about, and that they don't even try to learn about. They just spout whatever they are told by those who funnel the money to them. I thought this was an incredibly intelligent book, with an interesting format. The stories of extreme weather conditions are mesmerizing. Karen Sadler,
Science education,
University of Pittsburgh
Rating:
Summary: A new way of writing about global warming
Review: For years, like many Americans, I've been baffled by conflicting claims about global warming. Is it really going on? Is it even important? What Bob Reiss has done in this tour de force is to humanize the question, writing in a way I've never read before. Reiss connects all the dots, answers all the questions, and does it by travelling around ther world and telling a series of interlocking stories about victims of extreme weather, politicians fighting over the Kyoto treaty, and scientists researching the problem. He jumps from an old woman trapped in a burning home in Oakland to a US Senator holding hearings in Washington...a President of an island country in the Indian Ocean being dragged into the sea by rogue storm waves to a careful scientist at the University of Massachusetts making a key discovery pinpointing human participation in the deterioration of our atmosphere...from a Vice Chairman of BP oil company arguing with his daughter over dinner, to a Nashville student killed by a tornado, a Honduran Peasant trapped by Hurricane Mitch, a Washington lobbiest planning a campaign to discredit greenhouse scientists....on and on, all brilliantly orchestrated, and presented so it reads like a thriller but has all the fact and impact of a carefully researched documentary. Usually I'm tough on books, especially because I'm a scientist. This one slayed me.
Rating: 
Summary: boring
Review: i was forced to read this book. I'm not interested in the subject at all, however, i could have dealt with a 10 page outline of events and statistics, or something similar to put the point across. Im not interested in reading about how these people talk in the car. my question: if those of us who are forced to read this book did not purchase it, would the author have sold any copies?
Rating:
Summary: Drama and Fact combine
Review: It should be no surprise to find those with far right political agendas attempting to bookburn the modern day way by dissing books that are against their politics, regardless of literary merit. This is no exception, which is why a first rate book like "The Coming Storm" ends up with lower grades than it deserves.
A topic such as global warning can also easily turn off readers not only because answers don't fall into simplistic categories, but because the science is complex and difficult to understand. Being a good citizen forces well meaning readers to trudge through heavy science too often, and too often they end up avoiding the journey. What author Reiss has done with this book is interveave the science with drama. He has a journalist's ability to break down complex issues into understandable hunks--thanks. But for someone who wants his science served up with something to keep him awake, he succeeds even more. The anecdotal (and well documented) tales of survival--and sometimes not--are heart pounding and page turning. The Superstorms and severe weather outbreaks since 1988 are brought alive. We end up not only understanding the science of GLobal Warming, but the human impact. Much as The Perfect Storm and In Thin Air were beach books that educate, so too is this one. It is one of the few books you'll read that leave you satisfied and terrified at the same time.
Rating:
Summary: I must have missed something
Review: The controversey surrounding Global Warming has always left me confused as to what the truth really is and this book, unfortunately, didn't help clear things up in the least. I had hoped for some kind of lucid presentation of evidence that supported the claim that we are causing the planet to heat up rather than some inexplicable natural process. What I got was a series of rambling anecdotes about people in bad whether situations that were written well enough but totally useless in formulating a serious opinion one way or the other. There were some references here and there about studies and theories but it was never brought together in a solid cohesive form; just stories about odd weather. There is no arguing that ocean water levels are rising and glaciers are melting faster than before. What is unclear is why. The one thing that was clear is the fact that no one can agree and that there are definitely special interest groups out there that want zero progress towards finding out if where there's smoke there's fire (small pun intended). It also seems clear that the best the Global Warming proponents can do is give us a very definite "maybe" on whether we are or are not affecting the climate in any serious way. This does not mean for a second that Global Warming is not a real issue. It just means that, for me at least, this book was a waste of time because it tells you nothing conclusive. If you want some interesting stories about people who have experienced bad weather or some tales about the people who study weather then this book might be worth a read. If you want a clear, no-nonsense presentation of evidence of Global Warming keep looking. You won't find any such answers here.
Rating:
Summary: It's very simple, if you think a little.
Review: This book is an engaging mixture of anecdote, some facts, and a good deal of speculation. This interesting amalgam doesn't harden into convincing evidence,however, and the book is neither persuasive nor a good learning vehicle as a result. Rather than expatiate, I simply observe that it is better than "The Coming Superstorm", which is a patent fraud. The real problem is that all these latter-day catastrophists ignore a few simple realities and a lot of history. Example: Of course any disaster based on inclement weather is probably going to be worse than a similar episode was 100, or 500, or even forty, years ago. This doesn't even come close to proving climate change. Rather the reason is simply because there are a lot more people, especially in environmentally hazardous areas, such as seacoasts and barrier islands, seismic zones, and flood plains. HELLO! If more people weren't killed than previously, the weather would have to have a merciful aim, something it does not possess to my knowledge. Another pitfall lies in the specter of rising sea levels. If you just think about it, melting sea ice can't raise sea levels any more than melting ice in your summer drink raises the level of the fluid in your glass. Why? Because ice is simply frozen water, and when it melts, the space the new liquid water takes up was space abandoned by the previously frozen ice when it melted. In point of fact, ice takes up MORE space than liquid water! That's why it floats. So don't wail and gnash your teeth when a SEAGOING Antarctic ice shelf lets loose a 4,000, or even a 40,000 square mile iceberg, because that ice shelf is already floating in the ocean. When land-based glaciers begin calving into the ocean in that range, call me. I haven't seen it yet. The same with melting Arctic sea ice. Finally, the matter of warming. The atmosphere is getting warmer, no doubt, but it hasn't approached the "Climatic Optimum" level of 4000 B.C. when Holocene temperatures reached their peak. Since then, by intermittent stages, the climate has cooled. Even so, from 1240-1289 A.D., the western United States was seized by heat and drought. The Anasazi were forced from Colorado, and the Nebraska Sand Hills were a moving dune field, not grass-covered, as they are in today's cooler,wetter climate.
What would today's Calamity Janes say to a recurrence of that? So, while I can't say the warming climate is not influenced by man, (it may well be, no one knows), I can and do say that professional worry warts like Bell and Reiss ought to get a little grip on common sense. Of course, since journalists know that blood and suffering sell, they may already be exercising it as they cry on their way to the bank.
Rating:
Summary: It's very simple, if you think a little.
Review: This book is an engaging mixture of anecdote, some facts, and a good deal of speculation. This interesting amalgam doesn't harden into convincing evidence,however, and the book is neither persuasive nor a good learning vehicle as a result. Rather than expatiate, I simply observe that it is better than "The Coming Superstorm", which is a patent fraud. The real problem is that all these latter-day catastrophists ignore a few simple realities and a lot of history. Example: Of course any disaster based on inclement weather is probably going to be worse than a similar episode was 100, or 500, or even forty, years ago. This doesn't even come close to proving climate change. Rather the reason is simply because there are a lot more people, especially in environmentally hazardous areas, such as seacoasts and barrier islands, seismic zones, and flood plains. HELLO! If more people weren't killed than previously, the weather would have to have a merciful aim, something it does not possess to my knowledge. Another pitfall lies in the specter of rising sea levels. If you just think about it, melting sea ice can't raise sea levels any more than melting ice in your summer drink raises the level of the fluid in your glass. Why? Because ice is simply frozen water, and when it melts, the space the new liquid water takes up was space abandoned by the previously frozen ice when it melted. In point of fact, ice takes up MORE space than liquid water! That's why it floats. So don't wail and gnash your teeth when a SEAGOING Antarctic ice shelf lets loose a 4,000, or even a 40,000 square mile iceberg, because that ice shelf is already floating in the ocean. When land-based glaciers begin calving into the ocean in that range, call me. I haven't seen it yet. The same with melting Arctic sea ice. Finally, the matter of warming. The atmosphere is getting warmer, no doubt, but it hasn't approached the "Climatic Optimum" level of 4000 B.C. when Holocene temperatures reached their peak. Since then, by intermittent stages, the climate has cooled. Even so, from 1240-1289 A.D., the western United States was seized by heat and drought. The Anasazi were forced from Colorado, and the Nebraska Sand Hills were a moving dune field, not grass-covered, as they are in today's cooler,wetter climate.
What would today's Calamity Janes say to a recurrence of that? So, while I can't say the warming climate is not influenced by man, (it may well be, no one knows), I can and do say that professional worry warts like Bell and Reiss ought to get a little grip on common sense. Of course, since journalists know that blood and suffering sell, they may already be exercising it as they cry on their way to the bank.
|
