Rating: 
Summary: Occasional Sunshine
Review: The pleasures of this book are anecdotal, not scientific. This is a stew of interesting geologic research and weather-related historical reveries without a convincing scientific framework. Although the book attempts to connect long range weather trends [in this instance, chill] with historical-political consequences, the author really succeeds in making the case that weather episodes are much more problematic than centuries-long trends. If anything, the reader is relieved of a fear of climactic Armageddon, as most of the weather catastrophes described by the author would be ameliorated today by better forecasting. And after several hundred pages of the evils of cold weather, the closing chapter on Global Warming appears as a welcomed friend.
Rating: 
Summary: How Stories Change to Suit the Climate!
Review: Thirty years ago, during the gasoline crisis (conspiracy?) the scientific "experts" said that we have no more than 30 to 50 years of oil left so we had better slow down before we exhaust our reserves. In the year 2002 we are hearing the scientific "experts"(probably the same ones) telling us we have AT LEAST 150 years of oil reserves left so we had better slow down before we overheat the planet. The above is so typical of the political left's USA/Capitalism paranoid mind set. If there is something wrong - blame America first!! I've read Fagan's book and although it is interesting and, I am sure, factual. I found the author's theme - present day global warming - unconvincing even based on his own facts. He presents the evidence that From about 800 to 1300AD(the Medieval Warm Period), people were raising crops and livestock on the west coast of Greenland and growing grapes in England yet he claims our present day climate is warmer than ever before! This period was before the Industrial Revolution, before hydrocarbon emissions and at a time when there was about 3/4 million people on the Earth. Presently about half of the worlds' scientists e.g. climatologists, meterologists, biologists, etc. say there is no conclusive evidence for global warming but it is treated as an accepted fact by the mainstream "intelligencia". Mr. Fagan's book is a prime example.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting history with a loose scientific connection
Review: This book describes the climatic hardships experienced by the Western world during the period 1300 to 1850, known informally as The Little Ice Age. Fagan, an experienced writer of books on archeology and history, does a fine job of conveying the past impacts of climate shifts on societies. He writes that "climate change is the ignored player on the historical stage." He extrapolates forward, warning us of the potential for major climatic changes in the future caused at least in part by human activity. He is less successful in drawing linkages between the scientific findings of climatology and historical events, leaving those connections implied rather than stated. More description of the science would have been helpful, as well as an acknowledgement that the degree of scientific certainty still is under debate.
Rating:
Summary: Good Historical Compilation, poor science
Review: This book is a good history of the so-called 'Little Ice Age', a period from roughly 1300-1850 in which temperatures in the British Isles and Europe were distinctly lower than the preceding several centuries, and severe storms apparently much more frequent. The author has compiled an interesting history of the period largely from anecdotal accounts, as actual temperature measurements were lacking for much of the period. His primary thesis, that significant climate change has a large effect on human history, becomes quite plausible. It is certainly true that many people perished prematurely during this period, primarily due to food scarcity.
Unfortunately, the book is strewn with numerous assertions, stated as though factual, that are simply unproven opinions of the author. The author is an archaeologist, and perhaps such writing is common in that field, but reading assertions that seem very likely incorrect or simply wild guesses detracts from the text. There are many statements regarding the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) which, though certainly plausible, have no basis in actual measurement. When the author discusses the 19th and 20th centuries, the drift from his own field becomes even more evident. His assertion that the cutting of trees on the North American continent likely contributed to global warming of the planet has absolutely no factual basis, and some would argue that such actions, coupled with the planting of crops in the place of the trees, actually provide a net sink for carbon dioxide. The truth is we have no idea of the effect, if any, of such tree cutting on global climate.
The book is interesting for its historical compilation. Ignore the attempts to delve into any science.
Rating:
Summary: Little History
Review: This is an ultimately disappointing look at a fascinating topic. Fagan is an interesting writer & one has no problem being drawn into the story initially, but then one starts wondering whether the trip is going to be worthwhile after all. The book is sprinkled with maps which definitely help clarify the author's points, but maybe it is the scientist in me that would have been happier with some charts with data. One response to this might be "Hey, its history not science" but then we get into the history and almost immediately we get into trouble, Right in the first chapter Fagan invokes the Treaty of Verdun as a codification of European order, then in the next sentence he says "Only the Pope and the Emperor in Constantinople were exempt from this stricture..." Well, yes,The Emperor WOULD have been exempt as would his entire Empire -Byzantine Constantinople wasn't ever part of Charlemagne's Holy Roman Empire either spiritually or politically & last time I checked the Treay of Verdun was essentially Charlemagne's heirs in the West splitting up their patrimony.... A trivial point, of concern only to specialists? I think not, I am a biologist not a historian, but if the author makes this sort of egregious blunder at the outset, how can we trust him later on? A real pity, as IF one could trust the author with the facts this would have been a great book for the interested undergrad or educated lay reader, but as it is I can't really endorse it.
Rating:
Summary: Tempature Trends Last Hundreds of Years...
Review: Until recently, the role of climate change in history could not have been considered with any accuracy. After all, beginning in British India, man only began keeping relatively accurate records about a hundred years ago and scientific studies of ice cores and tree rings are recent developments. Now, scientists have provided historians with data going back thousands of years, which has allowed them to examine the graphs of annual cycles of warmer and cooler temperatures and compare these to historical events. The end of The Great Ice Age some 15,000 years ago and the recession of the massive glaciers that covered much of Europe in the last 12,000 years, allowed the growth of civilization and the cultivation of annual crops for the first time. In this excellent book Fagen - an Archaeology Professor at U.C. Santa Barbara - contrasts the Medieval Warm Period of 900-1300 with the Little Ice Age, which followed. While the significantly warmer weather of the Medieval Warm Period allowed the English to cultivate wine grapes and the Vikings, in their open "long boats" to settle Greenland - which was actually quite green - and to explore North America, the Little Ice Age, with its dramatically colder temperatures and longer winters helped to hasten the agricultural revolution of the 18th century, deepen farming problems in slow-to-reform France which helped to widen discontent with the Ancien Regime and to contribute to the severity of the Irish Potato Famine which killed millions and sent millions or Irish to America. An important note is that the centuries of the Medieval Warm Period were the warmest centuries in the last 8,000 years and several degrees (Fahrenheit) warmer than today. One of the fascinating observations in the book is just how much temperatures fluctuate on an annual basis and that even in the midst of a general warming or cooling trend; there are individual years that are warm and cool. So, clearly drawing conclusions from a warm winter or two - as television weathermen and agenda driven commentators are prone to do - is sheer folly. Even though the author feels that we probably are in the midst of a general warming trend that began about 1850, which he feels can have dramatic consequences, he is qualified in his endorsement of the Global Warming theory. Fagen makes notes of the incredible complexity of the computer modeling necessary for climate research, the lack of certainty on the role of the sun that provides us with our light and heat and the difficulty of knowing whether to attribute planetary warming to man's influence or naturally occurring factors. This book is an important one for anyone
Rating:
Summary: One Flaw in the Book
Review: While Fagan's writing is interesting and captivating, it is most unfortunate that he falls prey(intentionally?) to the hoax of "global warming" which has been refuted by thousands of eminent scientists of sundry disciplines. Were it not for that, the book would be nearly perfect; but, I suppose throwing in a bit of the fictional heresy of our time is what helps to sell books.
|
