Changing the Atmosphere: Expert Knowledge and Environmental Governance. Edited by Clark A. Miller, Paul N. Edwards. Cambridge. MA: The MIT Press, 2001. 375 pp., $67.00 cloth (ISBN: 0-262-13387-3), $26.95 paper (ISBN: 0-262-63219-5). How has scientific knowledge shaped the development of the global climate regime, and how has that regime shaped the production of scientific knowledge? These are the two interrelated questions posed by the contributors to Changing the Atmosphere . Their answers result in a fascinating account of the coproduction of science and politics—conceived in both substantive and organizational terms—as these two forces interact in the ongoing effort to understand and regulate anthropogenic climate change. Clark Miller and Paul N. Edwards's excellent introduction to the volume sets the stage for this discussion. Thereafter, three chapters look specifically at the politics and science of computer modeling. In the first, Paul Edwards argues that modeling is inherently political because it is a means by which atmospheric scientists engage in “world building.” World building is the representation of the global climate, and the role of human activity in it, with the aim of influencing the policymaking process. Moreover, Edwards argues, this world building process is unavoidably subjective. Given incomplete data, limitations in computational power, and the desire to make models understandable and persuasive to those outside the modeling community, modelers must choose which parameters to include and which to exclude. They must decide which to simplify and which to render in more detail. Finally, they must determine what values to assign to the parameters selected. The alternative, he argues, is not objective modeling, but no modeling at all. This conclusion is echoed in Stephen D. Norton and Frederick Suppe's defense of atmospheric modeling's epistemological underpinnings. Simon Shackley takes Edwards' argument one step farther, asserting that climate models are inherently political, even if the modeler's goals are not. Shackley examines the political consequences of competing epistemic “lifestyles” within the modeling community. An epistemic lifestyle is the broad intellectual, cultural, and organizational setting in which a given …