An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming is a 2008 book by Nigel Lawson. In it, Lawson argues that global warming is happening, but that the science is far from settled. He opposes the scientific consensus as summarized by the IPCC. He also argues that warming will bring both benefits and negative consequences, and that the impact of these changes will be relatively moderate rather than apocalyptic. He criticizes politicians and scientists who predict catastrophe unless urgent action is taken, and he calls for gradual adaptation instead. The book has been criticized by some climatologists, including IPCC authors Jean Palutikof and Robert Watson.

This book is an expansion on Lawson?s 2006 lecture to the Centre for Policy Studies,[2] called "The Economics and Politics of Climate Change. An Appeal to Reason" [3] As explained in the introduction, the aim of the book is to examine each of the dimensions of the global warming issue, including the science, the economics, both from the perspective of long-term forecasting and cost-effectiveness analysis, the politics, and the ethical aspect. The book begins by arguing that "the science of global warming is far from settled."[4] Although Lawson accepts that warming is real, he questions the validity of global climate models. Specifically, he highlights the lack of falsifiability of their predictions and the fact that all models failed to predict that there has been no further warming between 2001 and 2007. He also questions if indeed the sole cause of the warming is man-made CO2 and how great that contribution is. Lawson raises several issues regarding the IPCC process and its findings, including the Hockey stick controversy, and criticizes the Stern Report. After the introduction, the remainder of the book proceeds under the assumption that the IPCC majority view is correct.

Lawson then examines how much warming will occur and what are the practical consequences over the next hundred years, based on the 2007 IPCC Report (AR4) scenarios and policy recommendations. The next issue analyzed is the importance of adaptation, what he claims is the IPPC?s most serious flaw regarding the impact of global warming, as there is a "systematic underestimation of the benefits of adaptation" and "the most cost-effective way of addressing the likely consequences" as opposed to reducing CO2 emissions. His next criticism regards the Stern Review, which he claims is "at the extreme end of the alarmist camp". He also critiques the Kyoto Protocol and the practical difficulties of reaching a global agreement. Next, he presents an analysis of the different technologies and market alternatives being implemented and available to reduce emissions, concluding with his proposal of a carbon tax across the board, together with the reduction of other taxes to compensate for the extra revenues. The book closes with a discussion about the discount rates used by the IPCC and the Stern Review in their economic analysis, with a more detailed discussion on the latter. The final chapter summarizes the book, ending with a warning about the dangers of the environmental movement, calling it "the new religion of eco-fundamentalism" and claiming that "we appear to have entered a new age of unreason.

I find this book to be highly controversial and unacceptable to some extent. It undermines the whole debate on global warming and what we can do to stop that. Nevertheless, I believe it?s important to listen to both sides if we want to understand climate change. Therefore, I recommend the book for all fellow eco- generation Ambassadors.

    Most part of the review was taken from Wikipedia as I find the review to be in line with my opinion of the book.