"Global-warming denialists, as some are aptly called, regard the scientific establishment with such contempt that they abandon the realm of reason." You need not read any further. In reality the 'denialists' are the real scientific community and if the authors do not have enough sense see that, then they really do not have anything worthwhile to say. There is enough crap out there and a waste of time.

But I can imagine that the Dorkster's mother will read it to him as a bedtime story.

Are Noami Oreskes or Erik Conway climatologists?

The book is advertized as a work of fiction – unlike, say, WUWT which is also fiction but not honest enough to admit it.

I think it is more sociological-based fiction since that is the main point (if there is a main point) of the book – which is that the anti-science political agenda may produce the opposite of what Deniers say they are trying to protect – modern western civilization. I guess it depends on whether you consider being knowledgeable and informed – or, like Deniers, you consider being stupid – the best survival strategy.

>>You have to read this.<<

Have you ever considered actually reading something yourself rather than always relying on other people to tell you what to think?

this is not a question. go to politics section

Here is a review by global warmer by Marting Lewis http://www.geocurrents.info/physical-geography/eco-authoritarian-catastrophism-dismal-deluded-vision-naomi-oreskes-erik-m-conway

You have to read this.