Michael Mann’s book: The Serengeti Strategy applied

The Serengeti Strategy. In scientist Michael Mann's world, it is the lions that are fossil-fuel powered

Peter Gleick, I felt sometimes, was a guileless warmie. He exemplifies the multifaceted, contradictory things that human beings are – he is both father of Ursus bogus, and scourge of bottled water. Quite unlike Michael Mann, who seems to only exist unidimensionally in the pages of Congressional hearings and local newspapers.

Talking of news, this is an excerpt from Gleick’s review of the latest Mann book at Amazon.com. I think he has read the book this time though, its pretty accurate in its description.

Much of the contents of the book are old news …

That is a good call because, among other things, it is literally true – much of Mann’s book is made simply of old newspaper clippings. Why did I pick on Gleick? Well, that is apparently called the Serengeti strategy. That’s not  a Tom Clancy novel, but a technique by which lions in Africa pick on the weakest animal in the zebra herd (dazzle, to be precise) and eat them up.

Anyway, if all this wild animal talk is making you dizzy, please do hang on – more coming shortly.



  1. hro001

    Shub, the comment from Gleick may, as you say, be a “good call”. But (putting on my pedantic English major hat), IMHO, it’s far from meeting the criteria of good English!

    You have indicated that, in his pal review, Gleick wrote:

    Much of the contents of the book are old news

    I’ve noticed that writing is not Gleick’s forté. This is a deficit (albeit possibly the least of many that he’s demonstrated during the past few months) which probably hampers his “rapid response” communication efforts. Had he given the matter some thought (or if he had received the benefit of a pre-post-modernist education), Gleick would have written:

    “Much of the content of the book is old news”.

    Perhaps one might be forgiven for concluding that Gleick and his ilk desire not only to “redefine” the scientific method, but also (in the noble interest of “communicating ‘the science”’) to “redefine” the rules of English grammar;-)