Rating: 
Summary: The TRUE state of the planet!!
Review: "Earth Report 2000" was written by ten scientists, each with excellent credentials, each writing on a different environmental topic. Here are the ten section titles:1. Population, Food and Income
2. Pesticides: Increasing Food Supplies While Preserving Biodiversity
3. Global Warming
4. The Coming Age of Abundance
5. Causes and Prevention of Cancer
6. Forests
7. Conserving Biodiversity
8. Water Options
9. Rescuing the Oceans
10. Global Air Quality It's a tour-de-force of all the important environmental concerns, and paints a much more optimistic scenario than we hear from some environmentalists and politicians. The book was edited by Ronald Bailey, who has also written on the subject in his book,"Eco-Scam: The False Prophets of Ecological Apocolypse." Ron Bailey was formerly producer of a national PBS series called "Technopolitics." His style is confrontational and expresses more than just skepticism. He points out various statements of some politicians and more extreme environmentalists that suggest they are willing to resort to deception to gain public support for an anti-growth environmental program aimed at the goal of a more egalitarian society. He may be a little TOO confrontational for some readers, but exposure to his points seems to me to be essential for ANYONE to reach an informed view about the environment. I srongly recomment it!!!
Rating:
Summary: The TRUE state of the planet!!
Review: "Earth Report 2000" was written by ten scientists, each with excellent credentials, each writing on a different environmental topic. Here are the ten section titles: 1. Population, Food and Income
2. Pesticides: Increasing Food Supplies While Preserving Biodiversity
3. Global Warming
4. The Coming Age of Abundance
5. Causes and Prevention of Cancer
6. Forests
7. Conserving Biodiversity
8. Water Options
9. Rescuing the Oceans
10. Global Air Quality It's a tour-de-force of all the important environmental concerns, and paints a much more optimistic scenario than we hear from some environmentalists and politicians. The book was edited by Ronald Bailey, who has also written on the subject in his book,"Eco-Scam: The False Prophets of Ecological Apocolypse." Ron Bailey was formerly producer of a national PBS series called "Technopolitics." His style is confrontational and expresses more than just skepticism. He points out various statements of some politicians and more extreme environmentalists that suggest they are willing to resort to deception to gain public support for an anti-growth environmental program aimed at the goal of a more egalitarian society. He may be a little TOO confrontational for some readers, but exposure to his points seems to me to be essential for ANYONE to reach an informed view about the environment. I srongly recomment it!!!
Rating:
Summary: If you're not caught up in doing the "Apocalypso" . . .
Review: . . . you'll enjoy this informative, well researched book. Offers a wealth of layman-friendly data on climate, population and other sensitive subject matter and best of all, expert assurance that the sky ISN'T falling, and what we should be doing instead of panicking.
Rating:
Summary: If you're not caught up in doing the "Apocalypso" . . .
Review: . . . you'll enjoy this informative, well researched book. Offers a wealth of layman-friendly data on climate, population and other sensitive subject matter and best of all, expert assurance that the sky ISN'T falling, and what we should be doing instead of panicking.
Rating: 
Summary: the guy below
Review: I find it interesting that people who disagree with those like the authors of Earth Report almost all respond like the reader below. They say "the science does not back them" and then find it too much trouble to be specific about even one point. Of course he did go right to the favorite attack of those who read Mother Jones: "my opponents have no credibility" that's right let's not talk about the arguments let's just sling mud.
Rating: 
Summary: Typical contrarian rhetoric
Review: I have been researching the motives of the good news industry for some time. As a population ecologist, my area of research concerns our understanding of the relationship between species richness and ecosystem function, as mediated through diffuse and strong multi-trophic interactions and feedbacks. What's scary is that, at present, we really have very little idea how large scale processes, such as nutrient and energy transfer in food webs, stabilization of the atmosphere and other life-sustaining ecosystem services at broad scales are generated at much smaller scales, where selection works at the level of individuals organisms. We do know that global ecological systems generate processes which serve as our life-support systems, and that their simplification impairs the ability of the biosphere to generate these life-sustaining processes for humanity. That's the state of the field right now. Many of my eminent colleagues across the world are working hard to understand how our continued assault on the natural world might affect the services upon which we depend for our own survival. In the background, are those, with virtually no scientific credibility, and who represent very vested interests (their paymasters in the corporate world) who dish out the news that everything in Eden is fine, without a shred of scientific credibility to support this. The alarming fact is that our current knowledge of ecological systems and their functions is too limited to support the argument that Bailey and his ilk (Easterbrook, Budiansky etc.) have been constantly dishing out to the masses: that the Earth is in a fine shape and can withstand everything that our species is throwing at it. While systems are somewhat resilient to change (bearing in mind that they are dynamic and become new systems in the face of environmental stress), there is no reason to believe that these same systems will be so robust in providing those services which permit our survival. This is a hard fact. I am particularly dismayed by the non-scientific propoganda which spews forth from a long line of libertarian think tanks - The CATO Institute, the Hudson Institute, The Competitive Enterprise Institute, The Reason Foundation, are just a few - which contain very little credible science but considerable misinformation. Consider the so-called blurb at the beginning of the piece, which says that the list of writers are scientific "experts". Ronald Bailey's scientific credibility is about as thin as it can get: he has covered science as a writer for Forbes magazine and as a producer for PBS. That's it. And the ecological "authority" obtained a diploma in field ecology from the University of Zimbabwe. Unbelievable: considering the wealth of expertise available, they can only recruit someone with these credentials? I think that this is indicitive of the backlash and of their motives. I checked to see how many peer-reviewed papers this ecologist has published in relevant journals, and I couldn't find any. His chapter is a mish-mash of misinformation, misinterpretation of facts, and a basic misunderstanding of many important areas in conservation biology. I do not have the time here to expand upon this in detail: however, his take on the rate of current biodepletion and the consequences for nature and humanity was appalling. Invoking the use of classic species-area models to defend the backlash view that current extinction rates represent a fraction of the extant global biota was disturbing enough, but many key parameters were omitted in his thesis. For instance, diversity is multi-dimensional: extinctions at the species level are one problem, the other, hidden in this deceitful tome, is that of losses in genetic variation within populations. There is profound evidence which suggests that many, many species, particularly in tropical biomes, are declining rapidly and are therefore losing the genetic variation which enables them to respond evolutionarily to changing environmental conditions. Its part of a two-edged sword which may lead to a cascade of extinctions: reduction in habitat reduces the number of populations, which further reduces the ability of species to adapt to habitat reduction. Species lose their economic and conservation value long before they approach extinction. Furthermore, a reduction in the population diversity of a species coincides with the potential disruption of interactions with other species. Multiple interactions function by anchoring the stability of communities, and serve as cornerstones in our understanding of food webs. There is an unspoken belief pervading these right-wing organizations that all government is harmful and that corporations are a boundless good, which underpins the motives of Bailey and his ilk in writing this patent nonsense. I would gladly debate any of these individuals on these issues, to expose the degree of their scientific illiteracy, which stands out in the pages of books like this. It seems to me that these publications are meant to dupe the nonexpert into believing the corporate line. However, these publications do serve a dual purpose: they have inspired me and my colleagues in environmental science to enter the public forum and to expose Bailey and his backers for what they really are.
Rating:
Summary: Misinformation
Review: Ronald Bailey’s dumbed down “Earth Report” is nothing more than vulgar anthropocentrism marketed as feel-good ecology neatly packaged for the McMasses. Actually, even the title of the book is a misnomer. While Bailey’s book is a “report” of sorts, at no point does the author seem to express a sincere or grounded interest in the “earth”. Perhaps the book's greatest flaw, aside from the curiously misinterpreted statistics and erroneous conclusions, is its perverse avoidance of addressing the spiritual and philosophical issues logically raised when considering mankind’s roll in the natural world. While the book does a good job of inundating readers with all sorts of statistics and corporate-sponsored meditations, Bailey refuses, in a rather disturbingly determined sort of way, to pose the “larger questions”. The result is a book that too often feels intentionally rushed and suspiciously simple. In Bailey’s worldview nature is a tangible commodity with a value that can fluctuate (...). “Ecology” is seen only as a tool to better manage natural assets to meet corporate and economic needs. This “nature as product” ideology has been practiced by capitalist entities since the industrial revolution, but Bailey’s attempt to bring it to the masses, and the simplistic manner of his presentation presents a new and dangerous trend. Bailey even insists that we should judge a species as “good” or “bad” depending on its relative worth to mankind. For example, Bailey believes that North American white-tail deer are, “dangerous mammals” and “killers” because they have the audacity to stray onto roads and highways where they often cause serious accidents when struck by fast-moving cars and trucks. Not only do these deer/vehicle collisions cause human fatalities, they ALSO result in over 1 billion dollars worth of insurance claims annually. To Bailey this represents a prime example of poor asset management (the deer of course being the poorly managed asset). Bailey never once considers that the massive deer overpopulation (which has logically increased the risk of deer/vehicle collisions) may have something to do with reduced deer habitat and the almost complete annihilation of the white-tail deer’s natural predators (courtesy of mankind). Bailey’s disarmingly pronounced hubris in “Earth Report” is matched only by his inane insistence that there aren’t even any real ecological issues at all (at least in the “green” sense)! Counter arguments are seen as radical and suspicious. The technocrat-friendly ideas presented by Ronald Bailey in “Earth Report” are not only arrogant and misguided, they are downright dangerous. Bailey’s subtle and consistent suggestion that all is really well in the world, may just cost us that, the world.
Rating: 
Summary: A different ideology but one to take into account
Review: TANSTAAFL - It's just that simple. This acronym, meaning "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch" is at the heart of this book- understanding and embracing it not as a phylosophy, but as a law of the universe. Earth Report contributors understand that there is absolutely nothing in this world that comes without some cost. This understanding helps them make suggestions that encourage using laws of supply and demand to improve our economy. Overfishing: There is always a cost to fishing. When no one is responsible for absorbing the costs of fishing, the cost is in the fish resources- populations of fish dwindle and we run out of the supply. But if someone has a vested interest in a fishing area, they can pass the cost onto the human economy. Their profits ensure that the area remains sustainable. Healthy fish need a healthy environment. Would you let someone dump toxic waste into your private fishery? Of course not. Environment: This old topic has been hashed over again and again- usually with people arguing about whether or not humans are responsible for warming. But beyond this is the compelling argument of, "WHo Cares!" What is the cost of trying to stop HUMAN caused global warming? Huge. But we know that in the past, the earth has warmed even more without our help. If we pay the cost to stop human global warming, and natural global warming (or even worse- cooling) occurs, will our crippled economy be able to handle it? Most likely not. There is a real and dangerous cost to limiting our economy- one that this book points out when comparing the affects of natural disasters on robust economies versus weak ones. Any guess which one is more apt to deal with natural disasters? This book is one sided, and presents one point of view. Read it along with the other information out there and I think you will be well on your way to forming your own opinions.
Rating:
Summary: A different ideology but one to take into account
Review: TANSTAAFL - It's just that simple. This acronym, meaning "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch" is at the heart of this book- understanding and embracing it not as a phylosophy, but as a law of the universe. Earth Report contributors understand that there is absolutely nothing in this world that comes without some cost. This understanding helps them make suggestions that encourage using laws of supply and demand to improve our economy. Overfishing: There is always a cost to fishing. When no one is responsible for absorbing the costs of fishing, the cost is in the fish resources- populations of fish dwindle and we run out of the supply. But if someone has a vested interest in a fishing area, they can pass the cost onto the human economy. Their profits ensure that the area remains sustainable. Healthy fish need a healthy environment. Would you let someone dump toxic waste into your private fishery? Of course not. Environment: This old topic has been hashed over again and again- usually with people arguing about whether or not humans are responsible for warming. But beyond this is the compelling argument of, "WHo Cares!" What is the cost of trying to stop HUMAN caused global warming? Huge. But we know that in the past, the earth has warmed even more without our help. If we pay the cost to stop human global warming, and natural global warming (or even worse- cooling) occurs, will our crippled economy be able to handle it? Most likely not. There is a real and dangerous cost to limiting our economy- one that this book points out when comparing the affects of natural disasters on robust economies versus weak ones. Any guess which one is more apt to deal with natural disasters? This book is one sided, and presents one point of view. Read it along with the other information out there and I think you will be well on your way to forming your own opinions.
Rating:
Summary: Quality Perspecitive on the Environment
Review: The True State of the Planet, according to this book, is good. In fact, it is much better then we have been lead to believe. Sometimes, perhaps, we focus so much on the negative, that we forget how many positive things are occurring. This book reminds of the this truth. For example, we often hear the expression, the "population explosion." Implicit in this expression is the underlying belief that more is less. The more people we have, the less food, less resources, the less land, the less everything for everyone. It makes commonsense, but it is not true. People today have more food then every before. We are healthier and living longer lifes. The cost of almost everything is going down. How is this possible? The articles within this book describes how this is possilbe and gives us demonstrative proof of how good people really are. A few examples. More peoople, means more ingenuity. The more people you have working on any problem, the more likely it is to be solved. Thus we can not get more oil, because we have created new tools, created by these people, to get it. Moreover, most resources are not fixed, they change. Food is an easy example. We may have more people who need to eat, but we have more and more productive farmers to feed them. The truth is the term "shortages" is a misleading word. There is only a shortage when people want someone. Before there was that desire, there was no shortage. So, 300 years ago, there was no shortages of oil because we rode horses and used coal. Now that so many people are using cars, it may appear that there eventually will be a gas shortage. Maybe, but if it occurs, we will find substitutes. We already have substitute fuels, they just are not very cost effective. I also loved the article on fishes. It never occurred to me that we could be running out of fish. Apparently, we are. But this "shortage" is an artificial one. The writer explain how, when anything is free, everyone wants it. Most people can fish and eat their catch without limit on public lands. Why? We don't hunt at Yosemite. With more private fisheries, and less governmental intrusion, the fish population will boom. I also found the global warming article very interesing. Is the globe warming and if so, is it a crisis? I always found these scares amusing. When I was in grade school they talked, with fear, about the impending ice age. Remember those cold Neanderthals? I would rather be a little more warm, then too cold. Isn't most of Canada and Russian uninhabited? How many people live in Antartica. Well, apparently the data is mixed. We may be warming by .03 degrees a year, but we may not be. Don't buy any Canadian Condos yet. It is funny and strange that this book has been attacked in the reviews. I guess if a news anchor on local t.v. told us that the local bridge had 20 million crossing without a fatality, it may seem boring news. The one fatalty makes the headlines. Like that lone poor driver on that bridge, a few enviromental problems make better news. Just remember that, like that very good and safe bridge, the Planet is in very good shape, despite a few problems.
| 
