No real stand on man made climate change.

I felt this book took no real stand and was beating around the bush on both sides of the climate change issue. is he for or against man made climate change? Was hoping to read more about the questioning of the basis of man made climate change and why it’s a false alarm, but instead he ends up addressing the current reactions or over reactions to climate change., mostly in quantifiable economic evaluations.

Which is fair point but wouldn’t it be more impactful to question climate models and if this obsession over CO2 as the sole driver of temperature and cause natural disasters is even valid to begin with? if the basis of this panic was addressed, the reactions naturally would make it seem like a false alarm?