For my friends who have seen me say things in one direction or the other about global warming and are left wondering what my official position is, I have a link. This will take you to a speech that Michael Crichton gave in Washington DC.
You probably know Crichton for writing Jurassic Park or creating the TV show ER. But don't make the fallacy of thinking that a talented author/screenwriter/director/producer can't handle matters of science. Crichton has a doctorate from Harvard Medical School, and was a postdoctoral fellow at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies. His speech uses mostly published UN/IPCC data. Don't judge the man, judge the argument.
As of this date and time, I basically hold Crichton's views. Since I think he says it better than me, and this page is concise and covers most of the bases, I will let you read it for yourself.
Here it is.
You probably know Crichton for writing Jurassic Park or creating the TV show ER. But don't make the fallacy of thinking that a talented author/screenwriter/director/producer can't handle matters of science. Crichton has a doctorate from Harvard Medical School, and was a postdoctoral fellow at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies. His speech uses mostly published UN/IPCC data. Don't judge the man, judge the argument.
As of this date and time, I basically hold Crichton's views. Since I think he says it better than me, and this page is concise and covers most of the bases, I will let you read it for yourself.
Here it is.
Let me know what you think.
I've not read Crichton's book. I have read several reviews of the book and deconstructions of his thesis. Based on that reading it seems that what Crichton's argument mostly has going for it is the allure of rebellion.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2005/02/06/checking_crichtons_footnotes/
The above review and the references in the "Literary significance and criticism" section of the Wikipedia article on the book seem pretty compelling. Over the years my talks on the subject with my Physicist friends (two are politically progressive/liberal, one über-conservative) have been as well. Thought not climatologists their minds have both a scientific bent and a genuine interest in the global climate change phenomenon. They're all of the opinion that evidence for the current global warming trend being inexorably linked to the activities of mankind is conclusive. None of whom stand to profit from such an assertion.
My feeling is that State of Fear, like the Da Vinci Code has people taking fiction to for fact. The difference being Dan Brown clearly states that his book is made up whereas Michael Crichton claims his is grounded in fact.