I generally tend to have a positive bias towards books on climate change, because I think they should be read more, but this one was hard to follow. It felt like he took a very circuitous route to any point he was trying to make, and dropped a lot of references in there for the sake of making references. This book was broken up into 3 sections, and a majority of the reason this got 3 stars instead of 2 is recency bias because the 3rd section I found the most interesting and had lots of good points. Definitely don't want to dissuade people from checking it out, but I think it's unnecessary for someone who already understands the problems posed by climate change and is certainly not the book I would use to convert a denier.