Roy W. Spencer

I had difficulty deciding between three and four stars.

For the lower rating, Roy W. Spencer earned it simply based by the readability of the book. Understanding he is a scientist - specifically a meteorologist - he certainly writes with a passion but cannot stray too far from a more technical style. He makes his intentions clear: this book is for the layperson. The people who will most be effected by overbearing and punitive climate-related legislation, he hopes to reach in hopes they can show more persuade their elected officials to abandon these draconian cap-and-tax policies; laws and regulations created by politicians at the behest of intellectually dishonest scientists who proclaim the worst scenarios - a modern day Mayan sect, maybe adding another 100 years to the year 2012.

Ultimately, I gave the book a four out of five stars. Again, Dr. Spencer is a scientist's scientist. He dares asks questions and test hypotheses which go against the grain. It appears the most prominent global warming alarmist chose to seek out complimentary findings, and have shunned or blacklisted scientists who question alternate theories. My eyes glazed over during some sections of the book; yet graphs, numerical statistics and in-depth explanations prove this to be a book of science geared towards the least trained.

Still unsure if I fully grasp the specifics of "forcing" and the "feedback mechanism", Dr. Spencer explains his theory and findings at length. Only in natural science can a "positive feedback" be a negative thing or the counter be positive. It is far easier to understand that an 18 gauge intravenous catheter's diameter is larger than a 25 gauge catheter.

It is interesting to realize Dr. Spencer's theory that clouds influence the earth's temperature, yet his scientific query is ignored by the very people who claim to be curious. What's more ironic is while Dr. Spencer's ideas are disregarded, at one time the Obama Administration weighed the option of shooting particles into the atmosphere to deflect the sun's radiant heat.

The fact that Dr. Spencer does not claim his theory to be absolute correct one, but he is dismayed there is a resounding lack of interest in investigating his idea. He is shocked at how lacking the field is in understanding (or proving) human's contribution to temperature fluctuations; according to the alarmists and law makers, nature is unwitting victim and man is 100% at fault in any change, warmer or cooler.

Dr. Spencer attempted to write a book to make the counterargument "accessible" to the non-scientist. Unfortunately, the subject matter is unfriendly to such a task. His goal is tantamount to an astrophysicist writing a book a sixth-grader could understand. This book is not for a light read in a comfy chair to pass a few hours. show less

While thought provoking, I believe many of the hypotheses have been proven incorrect since the publication of the book in 2009, and the climate models modified to account for the others.

A good attack on the alarmists by one of the climatologists who is keen on the use of satellite data as opposed to the far more fungible data used by his peers.

Erik's review: Okay.
My review: Not read yet.