Apocalypse Never: Difference between revisions
→Negative: Expanded more detail to Peter Gleick's review of the book. Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Some linking Tags: Visual edit Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
=== Negative === |
=== Negative === |
||
In reviewing ''Apocalypse Never'' for Yale Climate Connections, environmental scientist [[Peter Gleick]] argued that "bad science and bad arguments abound" in ''Apocalypse Never'', writing that "What is new in here isn't right, and what is right isn't new." He criticises Shellenberger for using flawed arguments to dismiss the threat of species extinctions via Climate Change. He argues that Shellenberger confuses the concept of species |
In reviewing ''Apocalypse Never'' for [[Yale Climate Connections]], environmental scientist [[Peter Gleick]] argued that "bad science and bad arguments abound" in ''Apocalypse Never'', writing that "What is new in here isn't right, and what is right isn't new." He criticises Shellenberger for using flawed arguments to dismiss the threat of [[Species extinction|species extinctions]] via Climate Change. He argues that Shellenberger confuses the concept of [[Species richness|species “richness]]” with “[[biodiversity]]”, and that he misunderstood the study that he cites. And that Shellenberger uses a set of [[Logical Fallacies|logical fallacies]], misrepresentation, and selective use of evidence in his book. Gleick also points out that Shellenberger had tried to argue that that people were wrong to say that recent extreme events like forest fires, floods, heat waves, and droughts, were worsened by climate change. But to support such argument, Shellenberger had cherrypicked certain events and cited out of date research. And had ignored an increasing abundance of literature that shows strong links between climate change and worsening of extreme events, including [[hurricanes]], heat deaths, flooding, decreasing ice, etc.<ref>{{cite web|last=Gleick|first=Peter H.|date=15 July 2020|title=Book review: Bad science and bad arguments abound in 'Apocalypse Never' by Michael Shellenberger|url=https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/07/review-bad-science-and-bad-arguments-abound-in-apocalypse-never/|access-date=24 September 2020|website=Yale Climate Connections|publisher=[[Yale Program on Climate Change Communication]]}}</ref> |
||
In a review for the ''[[Los Angeles Review of Books]]'' environmental economist Sam Bliss said that while "the book itself is well written", Shellenberger "plays fast and loose with the facts" and "Troublingly, he seems more concerned with showing climate-denying conservatives clever new ways to own the libs than with convincing environmentalists of anything."<ref name='LARB'>{{cite news |last=Bliss |first=Sam |date=6 October 2020 |title=The Stories Michael Shellenberger Tells |url=https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-stories-michael-shellenberger-tells/ |work=[[Los Angeles Review of Books]] |location= |access-date=31 January 2021}}</ref> Similarly, environmental and technological social scientists Taylor Dotson and Michael Bouchey have argued that as an "Environmental activist" and "ecomodernist", Shellenberger's writing in his books and on his foundation's website "bombards readers with facts that are disconnected, out of context, poorly explained, and of questionable relevance," and ultimately, his "fanatic, scientistic discourse stands in the way of nuclear energy policy that is both intelligent and democratic."<ref name="DotsonBouchey2020">{{Cite journal|last1=Dotson|first1=Taylor|last2=Bouchey|first2=Michael|date=2020|title=Democracy and the Nuclear Stalemate|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26934424|journal=The New Atlantis|volume=62|issue=62|pages=15, 26 |jstor=26934424|via=JSTOR}}</ref> |
In a review for the ''[[Los Angeles Review of Books]]'' environmental economist Sam Bliss said that while "the book itself is well written", Shellenberger "plays fast and loose with the facts" and "Troublingly, he seems more concerned with showing climate-denying conservatives clever new ways to own the libs than with convincing environmentalists of anything."<ref name='LARB'>{{cite news |last=Bliss |first=Sam |date=6 October 2020 |title=The Stories Michael Shellenberger Tells |url=https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-stories-michael-shellenberger-tells/ |work=[[Los Angeles Review of Books]] |location= |access-date=31 January 2021}}</ref> Similarly, environmental and technological social scientists Taylor Dotson and Michael Bouchey have argued that as an "Environmental activist" and "ecomodernist", Shellenberger's writing in his books and on his foundation's website "bombards readers with facts that are disconnected, out of context, poorly explained, and of questionable relevance," and ultimately, his "fanatic, scientistic discourse stands in the way of nuclear energy policy that is both intelligent and democratic."<ref name="DotsonBouchey2020">{{Cite journal|last1=Dotson|first1=Taylor|last2=Bouchey|first2=Michael|date=2020|title=Democracy and the Nuclear Stalemate|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26934424|journal=The New Atlantis|volume=62|issue=62|pages=15, 26 |jstor=26934424|via=JSTOR}}</ref> |
||
Revision as of 14:21, 15 June 2023
 First edition | |
| Author | Michael Shellenberger |
|---|---|
| Publisher | HarperCollins |
Publication date | June 2020 |
| Pages | 272 |
| ISBN | 0063001691 (Hardcover) |
Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All is a 2020 book by Michael Shellenberger.
Content
In June 2020, Shellenberger published Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All, in which the author argues that climate change is not the existential threat it is portrayed to be in popular media and activism. Rather, he posits that technological innovation, if allowed to continue and grow, will remedy environmental issues. According to Shellenberger, the book "explores how and why so many of us came to see important but manageable environmental problems as the end of the world, and why the people who are the most apocalyptic about environmental problems tend to oppose the best and most obvious solutions to solving them."[1]
Reception
Prior to publication
Before publication, the book received favorable reviews from climate scientists Tom Wigley and Kerry Emanuel, and from environmentalists such as Steve McCormick and Erle Ellis,[2] but reviews after publication were mixed.[3] For example, Emanuel said that while he did not regret his original positive review, he wished that "the book did not carry with it its own excesses and harmful baggage."[4][5]
Positive
The book has received positive reviews and coverage from conservative and libertarian news outlets and organizations, including Fox News, the Heartland Institute, the Daily Mail, Reason, The Wall Street Journal, National Review, and "climate 'truther' websites".[3][6][7][8][9]
In National Review, Alex Trembath generally praised the book, writing that "despite the flaws", "Shellenberger ... do[es] a service in calling out the environmental alarmism and hysteria that obscure environmental debates rather than illuminate them. And they stand as outliers in those debates for precisely the reason that they claim: Abjuring environmentalist orthodoxy carries heavy social and professional penalties, so few are willing to do so." However, Trembath criticized some of the book as "nuclear fetishism".[7]
In The Wall Street Journal, John Tierney, a long-standing critic of environmentalism, wrote that "Shellenberger makes a persuasive case, lucidly blending research data and policy analysis with a history of the green movement and vignettes of people in poor countries suffering the consequences of “environmental colonialism.”"[8] In the Financial Times, Jonathan Ford wrote that the book "provide[s] a corrective to many of the green assumptions that dominate the media. And if they make the world a little more questioning of the next polar bear story, that is no bad thing."[10] In the Scientific American, John Horgan said that "Apocalypse Never will make some green progressives mad. But I see it as a useful and even necessary counterpoint to the alarmism being peddled by some activists and journalists, including me.", but criticized the book for arguing too "aggressively for nuclear power" and added that "my main gripe with Shellenberger isn't that he's too optimistic; it's that he's not optimistic enough."[3] The book also received a positive review from Die Welt.[11]
Negative
In reviewing Apocalypse Never for Yale Climate Connections, environmental scientist Peter Gleick argued that "bad science and bad arguments abound" in Apocalypse Never, writing that "What is new in here isn't right, and what is right isn't new." He criticises Shellenberger for using flawed arguments to dismiss the threat of species extinctions via Climate Change. He argues that Shellenberger confuses the concept of species “richness” with “biodiversity”, and that he misunderstood the study that he cites. And that Shellenberger uses a set of logical fallacies, misrepresentation, and selective use of evidence in his book. Gleick also points out that Shellenberger had tried to argue that that people were wrong to say that recent extreme events like forest fires, floods, heat waves, and droughts, were worsened by climate change. But to support such argument, Shellenberger had cherrypicked certain events and cited out of date research. And had ignored an increasing abundance of literature that shows strong links between climate change and worsening of extreme events, including hurricanes, heat deaths, flooding, decreasing ice, etc.[12]
In a review for the Los Angeles Review of Books environmental economist Sam Bliss said that while "the book itself is well written", Shellenberger "plays fast and loose with the facts" and "Troublingly, he seems more concerned with showing climate-denying conservatives clever new ways to own the libs than with convincing environmentalists of anything."[13] Similarly, environmental and technological social scientists Taylor Dotson and Michael Bouchey have argued that as an "Environmental activist" and "ecomodernist", Shellenberger's writing in his books and on his foundation's website "bombards readers with facts that are disconnected, out of context, poorly explained, and of questionable relevance," and ultimately, his "fanatic, scientistic discourse stands in the way of nuclear energy policy that is both intelligent and democratic."[14]
References
- ^ Shellenberger, Michael (30 June 2020). Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All. New York City, NY: HarperCollins. ISBN 978-0-06-300169-5.
- ^ "Apocalypse Never". Reviews. HarperCollins. Retrieved 7 February 2021.
- ^ a b c Horgan, John (4 August 2020). "Does Optimism on Climate Change Make You Pro-Trump?". Scientific American. Retrieved 31 January 2021.
- ^ Emanuel, Kerry (2020-07-29). "MIT climate scientist Kerry Emanuel on energy and Shellenberger's 'Apocalypse'" Yale Climate Connections". Yale Climate Connections. Retrieved 2021-02-08.
- ^ Readfearn, Graham (2020-07-04). "The environmentalist's apology: how Michael Shellenberger unsettled some of his prominent supporters". the Guardian. Retrieved 2021-02-08.
- ^ "Los Angeles Review of Books". 2020-10-06. Retrieved 2022-06-29.
Shellenberger has a history of anti-green contrarianism. He thrust himself into the limelight in 2004, when he and Ted Nordhaus wrote an essay titled "The Death of Environmentalism." Thirty-three at the time, Shellenberger was already portraying himself as an environmentalist who had realized that environmentalism's problem was environmentalism itself... The story Shellenberger has stuck with is that the things environmentalists resist — nuclear, GMOs, fracking, industrial agriculture, and so on — are actually good for the environment.
- ^ a b Trembath, Alex (2020-07-23). "Alternatives to Climate Alarmism". National Review. Retrieved 2022-06-29.
- ^ a b Tierney, John (21 June 2020). "'Apocalypse Never' Review: False Gods for Lost Souls". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 7 February 2021.
- ^ Gillespie, Nick (2020-07-08). "Michael Shellenberger: Environmental Alarmism Is Wrong and Harmful". Reason. Retrieved 2022-07-12.
- ^ Ford, Jonathan (18 September 2020). "Are cooler heads needed on climate change?". Financial Times. Retrieved 7 February 2021.
- ^ Stein, Hannes (20 June 2020). "Die Illusionen der Öko-Romantiker". Die Welt. Retrieved 7 February 2021.
- ^ Gleick, Peter H. (15 July 2020). "Book review: Bad science and bad arguments abound in 'Apocalypse Never' by Michael Shellenberger". Yale Climate Connections. Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. Retrieved 24 September 2020.
- ^ Bliss, Sam (6 October 2020). "The Stories Michael Shellenberger Tells". Los Angeles Review of Books. Retrieved 31 January 2021.
- ^ Dotson, Taylor; Bouchey, Michael (2020). "Democracy and the Nuclear Stalemate". The New Atlantis. 62 (62): 15, 26. JSTOR 26934424 – via JSTOR.