[Madpaddy]

I'm just about to finish the book "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton. It is well worth a read as it confronts many of the popular beliefs surrounding global warming and rubbishes them. The author IMO is selective in his arguements but the book is still worth a read. Here is one (contoversial) review: link$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A') wealthy benefactor is about to make a large grant to an environmental advocacy group. They are working on a lawsuit for the poor put upon people of a south pacific atoll. The problem? Global Warming, and we all know who caused that! That’s right the good ole USA.

While looking for information on the case, the advocacy group is also doing what it can to actually cause targeted environmental disasters. One disaster prophetically told is that of a Tsunami generated in the South Pacific, aimed at the shores of California.

The story line gives Mr. Crichton a chance via his story proxy to tear into the absolute crap that passes for scientific discourse in the minds of those who believe in “global warming”. As such, I enjoyed the hell out of the book. You will find it interesting to read, just to check out the footnotes and detailed information that he practically begs you to go look up. I actually think that he should re-title the book “ Go look it up, Dipwad!” as that is really the point of much of the story. You are really missing half the story if you simply read what is written, go into the footnotes and you can find a treasure trove of facts and figures that will really make you the "man to be avoided" at the next NRDC fundraiser.

I laughed out loud at several points in the book and some of the items in it are eminently quotable. If you want to skim while in the bookstore, go directly to Appendix I in the back of the book. I think it should be moved to the preface of the story, it's that good.

I will only quote once and it’s a quote that he lifts from someone else.

“When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit for knowledge becomes a quest for power”

This is the core of the message behind the book. These are dangerous times that we live in, not because of the way we’ve treated the environment but because of the incessant need to “do something” and he makes clear the very real risks for following some of the idiocy that is presented to the public as “ caring concern for the environment”.

As someone who has had long friendships end because of my stand on “global warming” I can say that the book was a hit for me in a very big way. The book also brought out a new concept that I had not considered before. Much as been made of the “Military Industrial Complex” in our culture, but Mr. Crichton brings out a new idea, the “Political-Legal-Media Complex” where certain agencies are interested in hyping a “State of Fear”. I found this idea in the book to be the most interesting thing about it, as today we saw the release of the Rathergate report where two of the three legs of the PLM milk stool has taken a pretty bad beating.

There are many, many people who will find this book offensive, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

[mrflora]

You should read "Michael Crichton's State of Confusion":

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=74

and "Michael Crichton's State of Confusion II: Return of the Science":

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=76

It turns out that Crichton gets just about everything wrong.

Regards,
M.R.F.

[ChicknLittle]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Madpaddy', 'T')his is the core of the message behind the book. These are dangerous times that we live in, not because of the way we’ve treated the environment but because of the incessant need to “do something” and he makes clear the very real risks for following some of the idiocy that is presented to the public as “ caring concern for the environment”.

[TheTurtle]

Too many good books out there to waste my time reading Crichton's propaganda.

[mgibbons19]

I'm with the crazy mick. As I said on the other thread devoted to this text, I loved it. I know for damn sure that a lot of the discourse surrounding global warming is NOT scientific. As such I enjoyed the footnoting and citing. That we shouldn't read it because it might be inconvenient to our worldview? Well, that sounds like religous bullshit to me. sorry.

[TheTurtle]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mgibbons19', ' ')That we shouldn't read it because it might be inconvenient to our worldview? Well, that sounds like religous bullshit to me. sorry.

[Colorado-Valley]

Chrichton has created a goldmine on the U.S. speaking circuit. Do a little research on his new career. He's in huge demand among certain groups.

All you have to do to become a highly paid speaker is find a topic that will be loved by conservative businessmen, and then get paid huge amounts of money going around the country pandering to their biases and hostility toward science and ecology.

It's very common in America to compromise your principles in the hope of making the big bucks. Maybe "common" is too cautious a word. It's how we function ...

[thuja]

Most of the world would desperately love Global Warming to go away; or at least to think that human beings are not the cause of it. Because if we are involved, which most of the scientific community believes, than we have to radically change how we are living and acting on this planet. Michael Crichton fills a needed niche of selectively arguing against the GW/human causation theory.

So voila, a huge sector of corporate rightists, anti-environmentalists and Rush Limbaugh Republicans will swoop up this book in the millions and pay him huge fees to speak to them and tell them its ok you don't have to worry or change anything you're doing. Sounds like it was a niche needing to be filled. Of course the world is filled with denialists right now. Its one of the main reasons no one knows, or wants to know, about Peak Oil.

[Rincewind]

The issue of what science and technologies get accepted by societies is an interesting one.

My rule of thumb is:

If a scientific result or a technology sustains or enhances the current paradigm (consume consume consume) - it is Good science or a good technology

If If a scientific result or a technology questions the sustainability or provides an alternative to the current paradigm - it is Bad or Junk science

[justgas]

I find it interesting that people are more willing to believe that humans presently have the ability to create tsunamis, lighting strikes, flash floods and other environmental disasters just when and where we want them rather than believe that we are have the ability to prevent or slow down climate change.

As far as I know we cannot create tsunamis or flash floods. The science on whether we can cause enough shifts in the global climates to make life miserable for many of us might be less than totally convincing, but it should be more believable than the giant tsunamis making cavitation machine that Crichton made up.

[mgibbons19]

In all fairness, I would suspect that those who are agnostic on global warming probably are not those who think the tsunami was a US military creation.

[Madpaddy]

The good thing about this book is it made me look up and actually study global warming and the effects of manmade pollution rather than casually accept that man is a parasite and deserves to die off in large numbers to allow Gaia to revert to a healthy equilibrium. I was very like the lawyer character Peter Evans who could give no scientific references for his beliefs.

One thing I did learn from the book is that nature is chaotic and is never in equilibrium as seen by the well meaning but tragic attempts to maintain Yellowstone park in the condition that it was in 1880.

Using the book as a basis for government inaction on the environment is even more tragic however. I agree that it is the activities of man that are probably causing adverse climate change. It seems obvious that belching billions of tonnes of s..t into the atmosphere is bound to be harmful.

Finally, having Crichton testify in front of the senate on global warming is farcical. At the end of the day as was pointed out, he is just a writer.

[gg3]

You're about to go on a long drive, in a car with no gas gauge, into an area where there are no gas stations. One of your passengers says you might run out of gas and you should fill up before you leave town. The other passenger says there's plenty of gas so you should just get on your way and not worry about it. Who do you listen to?

Hint: How many peer-reviewed papers has Michael Crichton published in scientific journals....?

Case CLOSED.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', '
')Hint: How many peer-reviewed papers has Michael Crichton published in scientific journals....?

[holmes]

The communist and Nazi gestapos exterminated the realist scientists and intellectuals. Hes a fantasy writer which is real science in this weirdo man made BizzAro world of "faith".

[Zardoz]

Forget him, forget the rightists columnists who fawn all over him, and forget the fat cats who pay him to speak before them. They are about to be overwhelmed by events. Reality is going to prove our points for us. We won't have to do a thing.

And, unfortunately, we won't have to wait long to see it come to pass.

[Doly]

I would find it easier to forget him if he wasn't getting rich by writing a twisted version of the sort of stuff I'd like to write.

[Rincewind]

Hey everyone I recommend Tim Flannery's "The Weather Makers" as an antidote to the "State of Confusion".

It is a very good book although I think in some places Tim gets a little too strident for my liking. But and this a big but he covers the current state of the science well.

Cheers Rincewind.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ChicknLittle', 'A')m I the only one who finds it frightening that George Bush preferrs the advice of a fiction writer over that of the scientific community?