Negative Positive
Title: The Skeptical Environmentalist
Review: This book is a sorry excuse for science or criticism based on science. While being skeptical about environmental issues is probably a good idea, this is not the book where you will find reasonable arguments on both sides. Lomborg picks his data to support predetermined conclusions, not the other way around. He often chooses to cite studies or reports that are over 30 years old while ignoring or downplaying more current information. The data he presents are often superficial and misleading. He makes no attempt to help the reader see the data in context - yet that is what rational skepticism is all about. In each chapter he concludes by saying nothing serious is really wrong. So if you want a book that says, "Don't worry - be happy," lull yourself to sleep with this one. But if you want to take a look at why you might be skeptical about the claims of some environmentalists, then find a book by someone who can differentiate between being critical and being Pollyanna.
Is the review positive or negative? 