Posted on 04/10/2005 10:00:03 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
One of the many striking statements in Michael Crichton's best-selling novel, "State of Fear," comes in a footnote on page 43: "Since 1940 ... data have [shown] ... predominantly a cooling trend. ... The Greenland ice sheet and coastal regions are not following the current global warming trend."
Forget the words, interesting as they are in the context of supposed worldwide warming trends. Consider this obvious point: They come from a well-sourced footnote in a best-selling work of fiction.
Obviously, "Fear" is not the normal novel. It is, in fact, a jeremiad against junk science, against the politicized theory of global warming that has been embraced widely by grant-seeking researchers, governments and journalists in every corner of the globe. It is the equivalent of an Ayn Rand novel -......... ........
Fortunately, Crichton didn't stick a long diatribe in the middle of the book a la "Atlas Shrugged." He put it at the end, in an author's message. There's an Appendix I called "Why Politicized Science is Dangerous." Good stuff. Writes Crichton:
"Imagine that there is a new scientific theory that warns of an impending crisis, and points to a way out.
"The theory quickly draws support from leading scientists, politicians and celebrities around the world. Research is funded by distinguished philanthropies, and carried out at prestigious universities. The crisis is reported frequently in the media. The science is taught in ... classrooms."
No, the crisis is not global warming. The "crisis" he is writing about was the degeneration of the gene pool (circa the early 20th century), and the "science" was known as eugenics. The reference proves how science can be swayed by political agendas. Crichton argues that global warming is similar to eugenics, in that it reveals more about the preferences of the elite than about reality. .......................
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
Of course, the character of Ted Bradley, an actor as famous for his left-wing causes as he is for playing the president on a popular TV show is priceless!
news./
-the six on the list ahead of me a month ago must read both with a finger following the lines and with moving lips---
I didn't realize until after I had read this and saw him on cspan that Crichton is a Harvard trained MD.
The book I was thinking of just above is :
The Andromeda Strain
**********************************
 |
|||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
|
 Airframe The Andromeda Strain Congo Eaters of the Dead Electronic Life The Great Train Robbery Jurassic Park The Lost World Rising Sun Sphere Timeline |
||
a bunch of related FR topics taken from my links list:
Another Global Warming Theory Discredited
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1074142/posts
Boiling Point: Who's to Blame for Global Warming? (major barf alert)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1192006/posts
Case Against Scientifically Honest Bjorn Lomborg Dismissed
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1097022/posts
Cataclysmic Global Warming Prediction Could Have Been Released on April 1st
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1093553/posts
Frosty Blast of Reality for the 'Global Warming' Crowd
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1230051/posts
Global warming killing Great Barrier Reef (alleged "Global Warming" Alert!)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/962660/posts
Hurricane Scientist Leaves U.N. Team, Cites Politics in a Letter (thanks FairOpinion)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1326823/posts
Illarionov Attacks Britain, Vows to Bury Kyoto
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1169510/posts
McIntyre & McKitrick
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/trc.html
Petroleum Will Not Run Out Before We Burn Up
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1177382/posts
Pollution Indicated as Most Likely Cause of Most Coral Reef Die-Off
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1077485/posts
Science Wars -- We need to free science from the Commissars who now control it (thnx JohnH)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1086889/posts
Scientist demolishes The Melbourne Age on 'global warming'
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3ad1202a4f3c.htm
Sun, Cosmic Rays and Our Environment (I started it)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1192860/posts
The Little Ice Age:
How Climate Made History 1300-1850
by Brian M. Fagan
PaperbackFloods, Famines, and Emperors:
El Nino and the Fate of Civilizations
by Brian M. FaganThe Long Summer:
How Climate Changed Civilization
by Brian M. Fagan
State Of Fear
by Michael Crichton
Thanks for posting this review.
I would suggest that every Freeper, who is involved in the battle against the Global Warming Watermelons of America, that, they buy a copy and keep it handy for the references.
Just citing the book when a mouthy Watermelon starts to bs about global warming, turns them into angry and shaky jello. Then, when you mention Michael's references, global warming takes over and their shaky jello starts to melt.
Almost every one of those has been transformed into a movie...most poorly.
Eaters of the Dead was pretty good... although they changed the name to the 13th Warrior.
Nice list , thanks!
Love it!....thanks...
:') You're most welcome. More in next post, which is a reprise.
As I've said before, "Global Warming" is the new Lysenkoism.Caltech Michelin Lecture'I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.
quoted from Michael Crichton
January 17, 2003
Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.
There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.'Remarks to the Commonwealth ClubI studied anthropology in college, and one of the things I learned was that certain human social structures always reappear. They can't be eliminated from society... If you suppress it in one form, it merely re-emerges in another form. You can not believe in God, but you still have to believe in something that gives meaning to your life, and shapes your sense of the world. Such a belief is religious. Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it's a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths. There's an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there's a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe... There are two reasons why I think we all need to get rid of the religion of environmentalism. First, we need an environmental movement, and such a movement is not very effective if it is conducted as a religion. We know from history that religions tend to kill people, and environmentalism has already killed somewhere between 10-30 million people since the 1970s... The second reason to abandon environmental religion is more pressing. Religions think they know it all, but the unhappy truth of the environment is that we are dealing with incredibly complex, evolving systems, and we usually are not certain how best to proceed. Those who are certain are demonstrating their personality type, or their belief system, not the state of their knowledge.
by Michael Crichton
September 15, 2003
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
