Customer Reviews for

Real Global Warming Disaster: Is the obsession with 'climate change' turning out to be the most costly scientific blunder in history?

Average Rating 5
( 4 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
Sort by: Showing all of 4 Customer Reviews
Page 1 of 1
  • Anonymous

    Posted April 9, 2013

    Global b.s.

    This book was fantastic.a must read fpr everyone. Thanks mr. Booker

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted January 22, 2012

    Why is this available on Kindle and not on the Nook?

    This is a great read and we tried to find it for our Nook. Unfortunately, it's not available in that format. Interesting, since it IS available for the Kindle.....

    Can we spell censorship?

    1 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted December 22, 2009

    I Also Recommend:

    Provides evidence that undermines extreme Green claims

    This is a very thought-provoking book, though some may find it just provoking. It presents evidence that undermines the claims of the most extreme Green zealots.

    Yet the book has its flaws too. It has a key misprint: a 7.70C temperature drop, for 0.70C. Don't publishers employ proof-readers any more? Carelessly, Booker writes that 1934 was the world's warmest year, when the research he cites clearly referred to the USA's warmest year.

    The recent warming is not unprecedented. The Holocene Maximum of 7000-3000 BC, the Roman Warming of 200BC-540AD, the Medieval Warming of 900-1300 were all warmer than now, yet the planet survived.

    The Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research rejected Freedom of Information requests for data on the weather stations it used. Professor Phil Jones (now head of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia) wrote in 1990 that its stations had 'few, if any changes in instrumentation, location or observation times'. He based this statement on a US Department of Energy report on just 35 of the 84 stations, which had found that fully half of the 35 had been moved!

    The Met Office consistently predicts more warming than actually happens. For example, using the same computer model that gave the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change its forecasts for 2100, the Met Office forecast that 2007 would be the world's 'warmest year on record', with Britain 'set to enjoy another sizzling summer', that 2008 would be one of the 'top ten warmest years' ever, that 2009 would be one of the 'five warmest years on record', with a 'barbecue summer' in Britain, and that our winter would be 'milder than average'. All wrong: in February it admitted that 2008-9 was 'the coldest winter for 13 years'.

    We are told that global warming causes an ever-growing number of extreme weather events. Yet hurricane activity was lower in the 2000s than in the 1930s, 1940s or 1950s. The IPCC's 2007 report confirmed, "there is no clear trend in the annual numbers of tropical cyclones." There were seven major droughts between 1900 and 1920, seven between 1921 and 1940, eight between 1941 and 1960, five between 1961 and 1980, but only three between 1981 and 2000.

    The same IPCC report said, "Antarctic sea ice extent continues to show inter-annual variability and localised changes but no statistically significant average trends, consistent with the lack of warming reflected in atmospheric temperatures averaged across the region. . Current global model studies project that the Antarctic Ice Sheet will remain too cold for widespread surface melting and is expected to gain in mass due to increased snowfall."

    Coal and nuclear power stations produce 55 per cent of our electricity, wind turbines just 0.5 per cent. Many of these power stations are to be closed down under EU orders, causing a 40 per cent energy shortfall. EU rules allow subsidies for wind farms, but not for nuclear power stations. The government's 2003 White Paper said, "We do not propose new nuclear build."

    The Climate Change Act of 2008 committed the state "to ensure that the net UK carbon account for 2050 is at least 80 per cent lower than the 1990 baseline." This could only be achieved by closing down the rest of our industry. As Energy Minister John Hutton said in September 2008, "no coal and no nuclear means no power, no future." Brown sacked him two weeks later.

    This April, the government said no new coal-fired power stations w

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted February 7, 2010

    No text was provided for this review.

Sort by: Showing all of 4 Customer Reviews
Page 1 of 1