Beyond Debate by Shahir Masri a Review

The goal of this blog is to create a list of what I call super facts. Super facts are important and true facts that are nevertheless highly surprising to many, misunderstood, or disputed among the public. They are special facts that we all can learn something important from. However, I also make posts that are not super facts but feature other interesting information, such as this book review and book recommendation.

A Note About Liars on Amazon

I’ve noticed that most of the reviews for this book were positive but there were a few negative reviews from what I refer to as climate deniers. These reviews were not just misguided fossil fuel talking points, but they were obviously written by people who had not read the book or by people who skimmed the book and who did not make an honest effort to understand the content of the book. You can tell because the objections they raise were addressed and clearly debunked in the book in a way that was easy to understand.

I’ve read many books on climate science and there are always a bunch of negative reviews written by people who have no clue about the content of the book. Writing reviews for books you have not read is the same as lying, especially if you are slamming the book. There are reviewers who literally seem to be at war with the truth, and they spend their time trying to bury it, and in the process, they are shamelessly lying. Why would someone dump lots of fake reviews over books they haven’t read?

BEYOND DEBATE: Answers to 50 Misconceptions on Climate Change by Dr. Shahir Masri

Below I am listing the two versions of this book (kindle and paperback). I bought the paperback version.

  • Paperback –  Publisher : Dockside Sailing Press (July 14, 2018), ISBN-10 : 0692157417, ISBN-13 : 978-0692157411, 329 pages, item weight : 1.09 pounds, dimensions : 5.5 x 0.75 x 8.5 inches. It costs $6.44 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
  • Kindle –  Published : Dockside Sailing Press (April 12, 2021) ASIN : B092DPY7LL, 245 pages, it costs $9.99 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
The front cover features a photo of snowy mountains in the background and sea ice in the foreground, as well as the title and author name. The title is “BEYOND DEBATE: Answers to 50 Misconceptions on Climate Change” by “Shahir Masri” front cover | Beyond Debate by Shahir Masri a Review
BEYOND DEBATE: Answers to 50 Misconceptions on Climate Change. Click on the image to go to the Amazon page for the paperback version of the book.

Amazon’s Description of the Book

What if volcanoes are heating the planet? Maybe solar cycles are to blame? Isn’t carbon dioxide good for plants? These are but a few of the questions on global warming that are addressed in this book. If you are concerned that global warming may be a serious problem, but find it hard to know what to believe or how to help in the face of conflicting arguments, you will want to read this book. You don’t have to be a scientist to understand Dr. Shahir Masri’s explanations and solutions. They proceed along common-sense lines that are easy to follow. Climate change poses a major threat to public health and the environment. Yet, political squabbles and misinformation have stalled policy and enabled little progress to be made in solving the crisis.

Similarly, the notion of a “climate debate” has created the illusion of a divided scientific community, when in fact most scientists agree that human activity is causing the planet to warm. At a time when open discussion is essential, talk of global warming has become entrenched in politics and all but taboo in unfamiliar company. In Beyond Debate, Shahir Masri clears up 50 of the most common misconceptions surrounding climate change. He simplifies the science and resolves the confusion so that everyone may better understand the issue. Now is not the time for silence, but rather a time for conversation and collective action to address greenhouse gas emissions and begin to solve the climate crisis. Action begins with understanding, which Beyond Debate so eloquently offers. Masri conveys a sense of urgency while describing opportunities for hope.

This is my five-star review for BEYOND DEBATE

Fix your misconceptions. Don’t fall for disinformation. Be curious and learn.

There are a lot of misconceptions, misunderstandings as well as disinformation surrounding climate change or if you call it global warming, global weirding, or climate disruption. This book provides answers and explanations to 50 misconceptions. Some of the misconceptions are common but basic misunderstandings. Other misconceptions require more in depth explanations.

In addition, the book gives you an introduction into how the greenhouse effect works, covering 200+ years of scientific discoveries by some famous scientists. Did you know that without the various greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone), our planet would be 60 degrees colder than it is. It would be a snowball earth. This book is for those of us who are curious and want to learn more about this topic.

An example of a basic misconception is Chapter 4, “Earth’s Natural cycles explain recent warming”, well they don’t. For example, the Milankovitch cycles, earth’s precession, axial tilt, and the eccentricity of earth’s orbit, are too slow and would favor cooling right now, not warming. It is not the sun (chapter 5) and not volcanoes (chapter 3). Volcanoes release less than 1 % of the CO2 released currently by human activities, and they are part of the carbon cycle, and CO2 from volcanoes have the wrong isotope mix to correspond to the increase of CO2. He explains that the carbon atom comes in different isotopes (different number of neutrons) and that the mix is different for different carbon sources and that the carbon added to the atmosphere comes from burning fossil fuels based on the isotope mix.

I can add that in addition different potential causes for global warming result in different ways the warming happens (like a fingerprint) and the fingerprint of the current warming is that of greenhouse gases (he does not explain this enough). Another thing to ask yourself is if you think the current global warming is natural, why do paleoclimatologists and others who have dedicated their lives to studying naturally occurring climate change not think this warming is natural.

Another basic misconception is addressed in Chapter 23, “Climate models don’t account for the most abundant greenhouse gas, water vapor”, which is false, they do account for water vapor. Some people believe that because water vapor is a more powerful and abundant greenhouse gas than CO2, it should be what is causing global warming. That’s not how it works. We are not increasing water vapor in the atmosphere by emitting it and even if we did it would rain back down. Therefore, water vapor is not driving global warming. If a greenhouse gas isn’t increasing it can’t cause rising temperatures, no matter how abundant it is.

However, an increase in carbon dioxide warms the atmosphere which in turn increases the amount of humidity the atmosphere can hold (positive feedback loop) thus water vapor gives the greenhouse effect a boost. It gives CO2 and methane a bit of a helping hand as the emissions and increase of these gases heats things up, but water vapor is not driving it. This is not hard to understand and yet this misconception refuses to go away.

Some other examples are chapter 8, “Climate Change is Chinese hoax” – this is a funny one. Climate science is 200+ year old European science. Chapter 12, “Climate change is just a theory” – see “evolution is just a theory”. Chapter 15, “there is still uncertainty about climate change” – that we know it is happening and that we are the cause is well established but there is uncertainty about other related things. Chapter 36, “glaciers aren’t melting, Antarctica is even gaining ice” – glaciers and sea ice are melting rapidly. Antarctica was gaining ice for four decades despite warming but there are good explanations for this (for example, precipitation). Now Antarctica is losing ice. Chapter 43, “Electric cars aren’t that green” – they are much cleaner than gas cars, but it depends on where you live. Chapter 49, “It’s too late for climate” – no it isn’t.

So, as you can see, this is a fact packed book addressing and correcting a lot of misconceptions. It is very educational and great for anyone ready to learn and understand. It is also well organized and well written. Reading this book will make you smarter and I highly recommend it to anyone who is curious about this topic. I think we all have some misconception on this topic. Let’s correct them.

The back cover features an overview of the book and a photo and a brief introduction of the author “Shahir Masri”. | Back cover for BEYOND DEBATE: Answers to 50 Misconceptions on Climate Change By Dr. Shahir Masri
BEYOND DEBATE: Answers to 50 Misconceptions on Climate Change. Click on the image to go to the Amazon page for the Kindle version of the book.
Unknown's avatar

Author: thomasstigwikman

My name is Thomas Wikman. I am a software/robotics engineer with a background in physics. I am currently retired. I took early retirement. I am a dog lover, and especially a Leonberger lover, a home brewer, craft beer enthusiast, I’m learning French, and I am an avid reader. I live in Dallas, Texas, but I am originally from Sweden. I am married to Claudia, and we have three children. I have two blogs. The first feature the crazy adventures of our Leonberger Le Bronco von der Löwenhöhle as well as information on Leonbergers. The second blog, superfactful, feature information and facts I think are very interesting. With this blog I would like to create a list of facts that are accepted as true among the experts of the field and yet disputed amongst the public or highly surprising. These facts are special and in lieu of a better word I call them super-facts.

55 thoughts on “Beyond Debate by Shahir Masri a Review”

  1. What a shame that people leave bogus nasty reviews on Amazon! It seems, the subject of climate change does draw a lot of negativity though, and I appreciate that you are continually setting the record straight about these things.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you so much Debbie. I agree, bogus reviews are annoying. Climate Change is the kind of topic that attracts a lot of negative bogus reviews, but it is not the only topic that does that. But writing bogus reviews seems so childish to me and that a review is bogus is obvious to the people who actually read the book.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  5. Thomas, thank you for your superb review of a very important book. I’m taken with the facts you quote here and it’s an inspired format for the topic to directly address people’s misconceptions about climate change. I bet the author could have written about many more than the 50 mentioned here!

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you so much Annika. I believe you are right. He could have easily written about another 50 misconceptions and then another 50. I think most people will have their misconceptions corrected. However, no matter how well you explain things there are dismissive people who will intentionally misunderstand the content or write negative reviews even though they did not even read the book.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

    1. Thank you so much Ada. There really shouldn’t be that many misconceptions about climate change. However, some of the dismissive people and their associated bots are intentionally spreading a lot of misinformation, which creates misconceptions. This is done intentionally to cause confusion amongst the public. That’s why you see reviews written by people who did not even read the book. Climate change is not the only topic that is attacked by disinformation. Other examples are evolution, vaccines, as well as many political topics.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  7. I had never even heard of a conspiracy theorist until around 2013- and now it seems as if there is an overabundance of not only conspiracies- but people who are willing to fight for their right to disavow scientific facts.. I have no words.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. I have to admit I fell for conspiracy theories long before 2013, like even in the 1990’s. There are so many and climate change is far from the only topic that’s a target for conspiracy theories and disinformation. As for me, in the past I read a lot of conspiracy theories on climate change, Obama not being born in the US, WMDs actually having been found in Iraq, and much more. Back then I read a lot of rightwing news featuring conspiracy theories. Then I noticed some red flags in what I had come to believe and I decided to take a deep dive into it and I realized that I had been bamboozled. I did not spread any conspiracy theories, not much, I just got fooled by it for a while. All this happened before 2013. The experience taught me that there is a lot of disinformation and that it is easy to be fooled by it. Well I got fooled by it and a lot of people I know did. What I would never do and never did back then is write bogus book reviews for books I’ve never read.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

    1. Thank you Carisma. This post is a book review for a book that I’ve read. However, I did write a book about Leonbergers and my Leonberger dog. It is called “The Life and Times of Le Bronco von der Löwenhöhle” and you’ll find it on Amazon (and other places)

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

              1. I’ve gone through your book and it’s amazing, really impressive work! I did notice, however, that there isn’t any A+ content yet and the book hasn’t gathered many reviews. As a book marketing expert, I can help with strategies to enhance its presence and drive more engagement. If you’re open, I’d love to share some actionable tips that could make a real difference.

                Looking forward to your thoughts!

                Liked by 1 person

                Reply

        1. I agree. Scientists use data analysis, evidence and peer review to reach conclusions and they spend decades becoming experts in their fields. Unreasonable people latch onto propaganda and what they want to believe and don’t mind being dishonest.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  10. Thanks for this very helpful review of such an important book. I know how important the topic is to you. The negative reviews seem to come from people who see their agenda as more important than an honest evaluation of facts. It’s a shame; this is the same view some people have of biological evolution.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you so much Denise and you are right. Biological evolution, vaccines, some political topics, are other topics that are vicitms of bogus reviews and disinformation (the spreader knows it’s false). It’s annoying when people can’t be honest and make an effort to understand the facts.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  11. Thanks for an honest and well-thought review of a book that sounds like required reading for anybody who might have questions about the details of climate change. As you say, those who have a fixed belief will not read it and just leave negative comments. That is the case in many subjects, and even in fiction books. I guess people enjoy the power it gives them to leave comments and try to bring down other people’s work. Thanks, Thomas.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  12. This book sounds excellent, Thomas. I’m not a climate change denier (it’s happening all around me), but I’ll admit to not having all the facts or knowing how to discuss the details (debunk the lies). So, this sounds like the perfect read for me. Thanks for sharing your review!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  13. Thanks for the good review of this interesting-sounding book. It’s a shame that certain people in our world would rather spend money and energy convincing people that climate change is a hoax rather than spending the money to make changes and actually attempt to mitigate the effects of human-caused climate change. It’s also a shame that this also leads to the negative reviews by people who didn’t even bother to read and consider the book.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  14. I’ve never met anybody who denies climate change. The changes are obvious. The disagreement is over what causes climate change, whether it’s natural, cyclical, or manmade, and how accurate the computer models used have been over the decades of debate. As I’ve pointed out numerous times, the messaging has been careless, thoughtless, corrupted by politics and personal bias, apocalyptic, hysterical, used to control people, used for higher taxation, and used to reward green companies that make large campaign contributions. I’ve been following the debate since the 1970s. As I recall, Thomas, you are relatively new to the conversation. My opinion is that the United States (and any high-tech country) needs ALL forms of energy, especially with the rise of AI and energy-and-water consuming data centers. This should be self-evident since 1) clean energy sources are still being developed and perfected; 2) natural gas has been proven to be clean, safe, reliable, and abundant. Carbon capture methods have been developed to minimize the carbon footprint. Progressive companies like Chevron are actively developing new forms of energy, like biofuels and fuels derived from plastic. I spent an entire university semester studying natural gas distribution and the Chevron Corporation. I’m not a “liar,” as you like to call people, or misinformed. There’s a rational way to approach issues and a self-righteous zealot’s way. Calling people names and implying that you’re smarter than everyone else is not the way to sway people over to your side. Even “Nature” magazine was forced to print a retraction over a European study that proved to be flawed. Bill Gates, who invests heavily in green technology, admitted that climate change is not a priority over other things that are more important, such as healthcare. I also don’t know anybody who opposes clean energy. But Joe Biden and the Democrats tried to force EVs and clean energy down people’s throats before the technology was affordable and perfected, using tyrannical methods. People rebelled, as they always will. That was a predictable outcome, but the Democrats didn’t care. And before you assume that I’m a Republican, I’m not. I’m a registered Independent. I look at both sides. Thank you.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you, Dawn, for your comment. I try to avoid politics in my posts. Stating and explaining facts that are supported by evidence and backed up by reputable sources such as NASA, NOAA, the meteorological institutions around the world, peer reviewed research, etc., is not being a self-righteous zealot. Being misinformed is perfectly OK. We are all misinformed, including me, of course, and correcting each other’s misconceptions should be fun and not something be upset about.

      Before I continue, I would like to address your more personal attacks. I have never called you a “liar”. I referred to people writing reviews for books they have not read as liars. I think that’s fair. I also called certain claims in the TV series Landman lies, which they are, but that does not apply to you. I have never called you or anyone else commenting on my blogs a “liar”.  Saying that “I like to call people liars” is not accurate.

      Also, could you please give some specific examples of me calling people names and “implying that I’m smarter than everyone else”.

      The point of this entire blog is to present facts on different topics that are known to be true but still might surprise many people. Sometimes some of the facts can be uncomfortable to some people. My “Vaccines do not cause Autism” post certainly attracted some negative reactions. However, the point is to learn together and have fun. I did not intend to upset you.

      Regarding the other things you say. I agree with some things you say. I agree that we need all forms of energy. A growing population and AI data centers being a couple of reasons for that. Natural gas is significantly cleaner than coal and carbon capture is working but not used much (lack of incentives).

      However, many people actually do deny climate change (approximately 15% to 18% of U.S. residents believe climate change is not happening) even though we know that global warming is happening, and we also know that the current warming is caused chiefly by burning fossil fuels. There has not been a serious scientific “debate” on that fact for several decades for very good reasons. See my post “Global Warming is Happening and is Caused by us”. There is a lot of misinformation and disinformation on these topics coming from politicians both left and right, in media, and think tanks, but not much from scientists. Natural gas is cleaner than coal, which is a good thing, but it is a lot dirtier than wind and solar, see my post “Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy”. Check the data in the graph.

      I try to avoid politics but since you bring it up. You say Joe Biden and the Democrats tried to force EVs and clean energy down people’s throats using tyrannical methods. I am not sure what you are referring to but my guess is that you are referring to the EV tax credits included in the IRA. Those are tax cuts, but also implicit subsidies. BTW a March 2025 poll found that 76% of voters support EV tax credits, which does not look like a rebellion to me. The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) was a partisan bill passed using the budget reconciliation process. I assume that is what you mean by tyrannical. However, the same is true for the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (H.R. 1), which rescinded the EV tax credits. Both parties do this quite often, not just Democrats. Regarding the EV tax credits, subsidies are common and fossil fuels have greatly benefited from them in the past. FYI I am also an independent . Texas does not have an official party registration, but the Texas Republican Party has me listed as a member, but that is a hangover from old days. I am really an independent.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

  15. Java Bean: “Ayyy, dishonest reviewers and review bombers are the worst! Apparently lately people have been review-bombing the last episode of the TV show Six Feet Under because they don’t like that it’s higher rated than their own favorite shows. Not as important as clean energy, but still, symptomatic …”

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  16. I’m sad to hear about the people leaving negative reviews without taking the time to read and understand the book. I read another book about climate change while in university and noticed the same thing with it. I’m not sure why people take informative books as a personal attack or are so reluctant to change their opinions when shown scientific proof. I blame a lack of education combined with misinformation online. But thank you for your honest review and the fact based content you share on your blog. It’s honestly taught me quite a lot. I always believed in climate change but there was so much I didn’t know till I read it on your posts.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you so much Pooja for your very kind words and support. I really appreciate it. I just learned that writing negative reviews for books you have not read is called review bombing. It apparently happens happens quite often, and it is typically obvious to people who actually read the book but not to the people who haven’t yet read it, such as potential buyers.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

  17. I come from a journalism background and started writing reviews for my high school paper in 10th grade, so I am familiar with the concept of ethical reviewing, That means I don’t write fake reviews, rate books solely on my political beliefs, or rave breathlessly about a book that has demonstrable writing problems that are evident in the book’s product page just to “help” an author sell books or pursue a personal agenda. I feel strongly about this….so much so, in fact, that I wrote about it.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Thank you Alex. Yes what I brought up in this post was people doing review bombing, slamming books they haven’t read. They may do this because they don’t like the topic or they don’t like the author. I called them “liars” because they are intentionally misleading potential buyers. The same is true for the other examples you give. I totally agree with you. Personal agendas of any kind does not belong in book reviews whether the rating ends up being one star or five stars.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

Leave a reply to robertawrites235681907 Cancel reply