This was posted 10 years 5 months 1 day ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

FREE eBook - The Resilient Earth: Science, Global Warming & The Fate of Humanity (Save US$19.99)

113
FREE eBook - The Resilient Earth: Science, Global Warming & The Fate of Humanity (Save US$19.99)Affiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
grababargain on 24/02/2014 - 23:20 amazon.com (406 clicks)
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Book Description from Amazon:
A million years after the birth of our sun, the violent explosion of a nearby supernova nearly ended life on Earth before it began. Over the next four and a half billion years, forces of nature shaped our planet and the life it harbored. Barely surviving the traumatic birth of the Moon, buffeted by supernovae, and bombarded by asteroids, the resilient Earth endured. And despite planet-freezing ice ages, devastating mass extinctions, and ever changing climate, life not only survived, it thrived. Today, we are told all life on Earth is threatened by a new peril—human-caused global warming. The Resilient Earth presents the science behind global warming for a general audience, separating fact from fiction and truth from exaggeration.

Length: 407 pages.
Authors: Allen Simmons and Doug L. Hoffman.

eBook is also free on Amazon AU (save A$6.63) and UK sites:
http://www.amazon.com.au/The-Resilient-Earth-Science-Humanit…
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Resilient-Earth-Science-Humanity…

Books & Magazines eBook

Related Stores

Amazon Cloud Reader
Amazon Cloud Reader

closed Comments

  • GregRust on 24/02/2014 - 23:36

    More free books. Just what I needed. Thanks OP.

  • [Deactivated] on 24/02/2014 - 23:48
    +7

    In case it isn't clear: this is a global warming/climate change skepticism book.

    • UFO on 24/02/2014 - 23:55
      +1

      yep… uses the useless arguement that the "earth will survive" to placate those fools who think climate change is nothing to worry about.

      of course the earth will survive. of course life will go on.
      but its going to suck ass for those lifeforms living at the moment.

      the earth is very resilient…. duh!
      its inhabitants on the other hand when coping with the changes to come, not so much.

      • KiLLUMiN4Ti on 25/02/2014 - 00:24
        +3

        Accurate weather records only date back to 1917, such a minuscule snapshot of time to be making such wild claims on but hey if they can tax the planet, why not ;-)

        • dissin on 25/02/2014 - 00:40
          +5

          Are you trying to say the carbon tax is a scam, and this collecting of money is not lowering the earth's temperature, but is actually creating an industry and jobs for those lucky enough to ride the gravy train???

        • jong on 25/02/2014 - 01:13
          +6

          From http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/03/weather.feature…

          The England and Wales Precipitation series, which measures rainfall and snow, goes back to 1766, and the Central England Temperature series, which covers the temperature from the south Midlands to Lancashire, is the longest-running record in the world, dating from 1659.

          So your 1917 statement is wrong by about two centuries.

          There are also proxies - tree growth rings, ice (and soil) core samples, fossils - that you can use to figure out what the climate was like. It's a little like when you wake up in the morning, and the whole street is wet - you might not have seen it rain overnight, but you can make an educated (and accurate) guess that it did.

          Which oil company did you say you worked for, again?

        • KiLLUMiN4Ti on 25/02/2014 - 02:44
          +1

          From your link ;-)
          "Statisticians work out whether the entries are reliable, which is why the record going back to 1914 - when observation stations became more uniform in the way they collected data - is almost always the one used. The Met Office says this is the only reliable one (and it gives a picture of the UK as a whole)."
          I apologise…I was off by 3 years :-D

          Btw tree rings don't correspond to years, rather to changes in weather patterns which most of the time can be equated to seasons, but not always.

          Ice core science is bs- layers are made by a change in temperature not annually or biannually- a number of planes went down in Greenland in 1942 and we're found with hundreds of layers above them though they had been buried for only forty-six years ;-)

          Fossils use circular reasoning- you determine the age of a fossil by what layer it was found in and determine the age of a layer by what fossils are found in it :-D

          And if I were a shill- u really think I'd be on Ozbargain :-D, I'd be heading for GLP m8 ;-)
          Oil companies are the scum of the earth and the reason why we send our children to die at war, when did I insult you?
          Nice argument tho lol- Neg away ;-)

    • GregRust on 25/02/2014 - 00:17
      -1

      Ha. Should have read before I bought then. Damn you OzBargain!

      • GregRust on 25/02/2014 - 00:51

        Climate change denier negged my comment. Harsh.

        • dissin on 25/02/2014 - 10:30
          +1

          No, the climate does change, believe it or not

  • mycosys on 25/02/2014 - 00:20
    +3

    No matter how cheap they are, when it comes to science self contradictory cherry picking and lies are not a bargain or a deal, they cost us all dearly.

  • seb on 25/02/2014 - 00:26
    +2

    Yes, the Resilient Earth will likely survive more nearby supernovae, more asteroids and more ice ages.

    My farm aint gonna survive no ice age! What a pointless premise for a book.

    The point isn't that humans won't survive global warming. The point is that human cities and societies are going to suffer enormous costs if the planet warms and nothing is done to prevent/minimise/prepare for it.

    • lostn on 25/02/2014 - 01:35

      What will happen if the planet cools, like with past ice ages? Will we need to burn more carbon (sorry CO2) to keep it in check?

      • seb on 25/02/2014 - 02:15
        -2

        Well, the sun is going through a few years of low activity atm so the sun is doing its best to keep the planet cool, even as the planet is getting warmer…

  • grababargain on 25/02/2014 - 01:39

    This book is about the science behind global warming. Please post links to books from other perspectives if you have them.

  • slipperypete on 25/02/2014 - 10:48

    I guess it is good to have another perspective on climate change, but the fact is that 90% of climatologist….the ones who actually study the climate think that global warming is real, is man made and is of catastrophic concern. A vast amount of climate change deniers have motives. People like Gina Reinhardt and Clive Palmer both deny it…surprise. The author of this book Douglas Hoffman is an American businessman, accountant and former congressional candidate hmmm!!!

    • KiLLUMiN4Ti on 25/02/2014 - 11:47
      +2

      "but the fact is that 90% of climatologist….the ones who actually study the climate think that global warming is real, is man made and is of catastrophic concern."
      -BS, there is an agenda ;-) Those opposed are rarely heard and those who are are demonised and/or silenced by msm owned by a few corporate elite. Whoever controls the media controls the mind ;-)
      Carbon tax is the largest tax ever to be forced on humanity and the money from it does NOTHING to help the environment, rather lines the pockets of already very rich men. A Latin phrase comes to mind, "Cui bono"- To whose benefit?
      Instead of allowing companies to pollute this world if they 'pay' for it, why not shut down the ones that do pollute it for good? (like the oil company I supposedly work for :-P) When fines are capped at a fraction of the cost of what disposing of the waste safely would be, it makes sense that companies continue polluting. Remember, a company is all about making more and more money for its shareholders each year, growing and expanding without a thought for this beautiful world we live in (kinda like a virus when you think about it).

      When the last tree has been cut down, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then will we realize that one cannot eat money. ;-)

      • mycosys on 25/02/2014 - 13:15
        +1

        It is 97% of climate scientists that agree actually. Just about the largest scientific consensus ever reached on anything. We dont even have that good a consensus that the earth revolves round the sun.

        "Anti NWO Warrior" Of course there is an agenda - gain the greatest accuracy and understanding of our climate possible and prevent the destruction of life as we know it.
        What are you smoking to think that the carbon tax is the largest tax ever??? Just about every tax is larger! And the money was being directly used to fund clean power projects.
        Why not shut down polluters for good? because we would be a lot better off if they switched to green production - we need products like aluminium for instance which needs masses of electricity and hence is indirectly a massive emitter thanks to our stupid nuclear free policies - it isnt as simple as you try to make it out "Anti NWO Warrior"

        And btw - you are a bit late, the NWO was implemented 20+ years ago. try and stay off mercola and whale.to from now on, ok

        • lostn on 25/02/2014 - 13:26
          +1

          Really? Name a reputable scientist or study that denies the earth revolves around the sun.

        • KiLLUMiN4Ti on 25/02/2014 - 14:20
          -1

          "It is 97% of climate scientists that agree actually. Just about the largest scientific consensus ever reached on anything. We dont even have that good a consensus that the earth revolves round the sun."
          You sir are a fool and have absolutely NO idea what your talking about.

          http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/global-warming-a-get-rich-quic…
          (just in case you don't visit the link I've made sure you can see it)

          "This just in: Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) has been discovered to be one of the best “get rich quick” schemes in the history of mankind. Research scientists, heads of state, bureaucrats, engineers, major media figures and anyone even remotely related to Al Gore, seem to be taking advantage of this massive windfall. Sadly, for the enablers, the deniers and regular people who still have to work for a living, that windfall seems to stem directly from their pockets.

          From 2008 through 2013, the poor schlub working taxpayers just in America have been forced to shell out $77 billion to stem the rising tide of global warming. They will be adding another 11.6 billion come 2014. On a bright note, since the globe really hasn’t warmed any in over 17 years, maybe that was money well spent. OK, so none of the “research” or “science” has done anything to actually affect the climate, but money was spent and the temperatures did not rise. So, obviously, mother nature got the memo and don’t people feel silly for complaining about it?

          The whole AGW concept to seems to rely primarily on good marketing and a consistent message. As any good marketer – or student of German history – will be happy to explain:

          Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.
          – Famous Old German National Socialist Party Leader

          Even the introduction of completely contradictory evidence, will not stem the flow of all that money. Recently for instance, it was explained in great detail that volcanoes are responsible for causing global warming to go on “hiatus.” A reasonable supposition which completely destroys all of the previous “scientific” explanations for where the actual heat had gone.

          People in the global warming business had been laboring furiously to explain where all that heat, which they knew was occurring, was hiding itself. A few weeks ago, they suspected Polar Vortex killed Global Warming in the Oceans with a Candlestick. Actually, most of them were ready to Accuse, until somebody flipped over that Volcano card. Now, it wasn’t even Global Warming who got killed! A. Gee Dubya is only on vacation, because volcanoes might mean the death of him.

          Of course, the people who are making the most money off of this global warming scheme insist they are not getting rich, even though it’s happening quickly. An untold number of websites, blog spots, online documents and “peer-reviewed papers” written and produced by the people who are making money off of global warming, clearly explain why global warming should receive more funding.

          Incredibly, despite being listed as “absolutely for reals proof” of AGW, almost all of those arguments include the words “might, should, possibly, may and most likely.” All of which come with the perennial favorite “consensus.” Since when did good science require a consensus?

          In other news: The Intergovernmental Committee on Provocative Pontification (ICPP) recently tapped Anthony Weiner to head up their social media photo outreach program. Weiner insists that even though he leans to the left, he will rise to the occasion. Nobel Peace Prize winner and all around global warming guru Al Gore, was heard to say that Weiner was only in it for the money. Of course, Gore was heard saying that at the bank, after cashing his $500 million check from Al Jazeera – which is funded completely through oil profits. However, as Gore likes to say, “some truths are very inconvenient.”

          Of course, there are a lot more perks for the AGW crowd than just free billions from the government: They also get to make cute cartoons about stabbing “deniers” in the heart with an icicle – which pays them pretty good money, too. Naturally, it would be an “open act of naked hostility” if the cartoon was drawn of Michael Mann getting ice picked by a denier. However, when a “consensus” theory is based mostly on conjecture and  computer models which “predict” anything and everything as evidence, double standards are to be expected.

          Since the discovery that global warming is a very excellent get-rich-quick scheme, Carbon Credit Offsets have been trading heavily in the Bitcoin market. Investors cannot wait until 2025 when the hiatus “should” be over, and the globe can start warming again.

          Satire by Ben Gaul"

          "NWO was implemented 20+ years ago" XD
          Just coz daddy bush n friends says so huh?
          What lodge do you belong to? :-P

          Anyway have said it before and will say it again- I refuse to battle wits with an unarmed person and you sir are hopelessly unarmed ;-)

          Srry all for the wall'o'text. Will not post anymore essays :-D
          Have a great day all :-)

        • slipperypete on 25/02/2014 - 17:13

          People will make money wherever or whatever the circumstance. Global warming is just another avenue.

          To say that climatologists have an agenda is like a conspiracy theory. I've heard this one before. People can attack climate change in a variety of desperate ways but the evidence is pretty overwhelming…..especially by the people who actually know what they are talking about!!!

          Yes we live in a free society and are very much controlled by the press, still, there is plenty to read and to be heard opposing global warming. However if you do some background research, often these people are linked to companies or individuals that will suffer as a result of global warming counter measures. Everyone seems to have an agenda. Some to make money and others who simply are concerned!

          Actually I think free speech is evident in this book, its now going for free ;-)

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join