One of the worst narrators ever – he read in a staccato robot voice. Some lines were laughable. If he’d just read smoothly he would be fine.
The book was ok. It was a data dump though, and I felt like the author was debating someone on whether or not climate change would have negative effects. Rather than focus on the objective scientific research, he constantly told us every possible doomsday scenario. This makes sense when talking to policy makers, but I just wanted to learn. I constantly got the feeling that I wasn’t getting the whole story. A lot of it was “A 2011 study has shown…” Well, all sorts of studies show all sorts of things, and I need to understand them a bit more, not just have them quoted at me. How was the study done? What is the degree of error? What are the opposing views to that study? Who funded it?
The late part of the book on alternative energies was quite interesting.
I don’t think he dealt very well with climate skeptics/deniers. In the earlier part of the book he simply argued that they should be called deniers. In the end of the book he deals with their ‘arguments’, but does no more than list their bullet point claims and then ‘debunks’ them. It felt like a high school debate.