NYT: Bush's Chat With Novelist Alarms Environmentalists (Michael Crichton)

[Pirate Smile]

WASHINGTON, Feb. 18 —
-snip-
In his new book about Mr. Bush, "Rebel in Chief: Inside the Bold and Controversial Presidency of George W. Bush," Fred Barnes recalls a visit to the White House last year by Michael Crichton, whose 2004 best-selling novel, "State of Fear," suggests that global warming is an unproven theory and an overstated threat.

Mr. Barnes, who describes Mr. Bush as "a dissenter on the theory of global warming," writes that the president "avidly read" the novel and met the author after Karl Rove, his chief political adviser, arranged it. He says Mr. Bush and his guest "talked for an hour and were in near-total agreement."

"The visit was not made public for fear of outraging environmentalists all the more," he adds.
And so it has, fueling a common perception among environmental groups that Mr. Crichton's dismissal of global warming, coupled with his popularity as a novelist and screenwriter, has undermined efforts to pass legislation intended to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, a gas that leading scientists say causes climate change.

Mr. Crichton, whose views in "State of Fear" helped him win the American Association of Petroleum Geologists' annual journalism award this month, has been a leading doubter of global warming and last September appeared before a Senate committee to argue that the supporting science was mixed, at best.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/19/national/19warming.html

[ThoughtCriminal]

1. Bush expresses concern about velociraptor-human hybrids

:crazy:

[wordpix2]

75. lol

[awoke_in_2003]

2. Well, if he read that book

it is the first one he has read since "My Pet Goat". I doubt he read it, Laura probably read it to him after giving him milk and cookies and tucking him in.

[rodeodance]

29. ."This shows the president is more interested in science fiction than

science"


nough said!

[ChazII]

44. Wonder if

he read the book that 'The Day After Tomorrow' is based on? If so, we are in trouble.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

35. Now there you go again

Bush did not read "My Pet Goat;" he had "The Pet Goat" read to him.

[nofoil]

54. No Student Left Behind Quiz: Bush + Chrichton + Milk + Cookies =??

Now for our No Student Left Behind Quiz:

The combination of Bush+ milk + cookies + Chrichton are sure to

a) bring about Bush's secretly-desired resurgence of pre-historic creatures so
that Dick can have bigger targets for shooting practice

b) Induce a sugar-induced tantrum that results in a war against Togo

c) destroy whatever brain cells Bush has left through the ingestion of non-
organic, hormone and antibiotic-enriched milk products

d) provoke a well-needed spike in Iceland's bikini market

e) destroy the world as we know it

e) all of the above.

Now pick up your #2's folks...

[jobycom]

3. BREAKING: Bush plans to solve energy crisis by going back in time

with cloned dinaosaurs and burying them in his back yard in Crawford, based on scientific advice from Michael Creighton!

[Blue_In_AK]

4. Yeah, well,

if they think it's an unproven theory and an overstated threat, they should have spent the last 30 years in Alaska, and they might have a different opinion. ALL of us up here know things are changing, there's no doubt. Fall comes later, spring comes sooner, numerous thaws throughout the winter, ice cap melting, receding glaciers, arboreal plants moving further north, massive forest fires in the summer. We are the canaries...

Here is an example - Portage Glacier south of Anchorage, which 25 years ago had its terminus in the middle of the lake...



Portage Glacier now...

[alfredo]

10. Kilimanjaro's ice cap could be gone in 14 years.

By the looks of it, I'd say it will be much sooner.

[Marie26]

22. In Torino, they had to use white sheets on the mountains

to prevent the snow from melting before the Olympics. This in an area that usually has snow coverage year-round. The climate is definitely changing fast & it's scary. It's even scarier that there are still right-wingers who are trying to deny it & supress the truth.

[antonialee839]

5. Avidly read=carried it under his arm for photo-ops..

[Sequoia]

73. Upside down of course.

[tabasco]

6. Association of Petroleum Geologists' annual journalism award

:wtf:

[dchill]

7. WTF, indeed. A "journalism" award...

for a novel. I read the novel, it's pretty good - but it's NOT journalism. Strictly speaking, it's SCIENCE FICTION.

[daleo]

17. I guess petroleum geologist know what side their bread is buttered on

Less fossil fuel use = less petroleum geologists.

[DemBones DemBones]

47. I think that group was founded just to argue that

global warming isn't so. In any case, you can bet they get funding from the petroleum industry.

[Malee]

8. Well I am no scientist

but I do know that I've never had such a mild winter as I have this year.

[area51]

39. Welcome to DU, Malee. (n/t)

[high density]

9. Bush is a pompous idiot

...and so is Crichton. I'm not surprised that they had a chummy meeting where they were in "near-total agreement."

[Lorien]

11. Global warming isn't a theory. Here's some FACTS:

There were 928 peer-reviewed scientific journal articles about Global Warming written between 1993-2003. The percentage of those that cast doubt on the existence of Global Warming or that it is caused by humans is ZERO.

However, between 1988 and 2002 there were 3,543 "hard news" stories published by the NYT, LAT, WP and WSJ on Global Warming. The percentage of those stories that cast doubt? FIFTY-THREE PERCENT.

(source: the Utne reader, Jan-Feb 2006)

Now, I wonder which stories that fiction writer cherry picked for his "facts"?

[killbotfactory]

12. I wanted to punch Michael Crichton in the face while reading the book

I felt like I was inside Dick Cheney's wet dream.

[Lori Price CLG]

13. Well, the biggest shocker here is that Bush read a book. n/t

[norml]

14. Michael Crichton Wins Journalism Award From Petroleum Association

Michael Crichton Wins Journalism Award From Petroleum Association

This is the only news article I could find on the web that mentions this.


snip


Another favorite of climate change skeptics is the author Michael Crichton. Crichton penned the novel State of Fear, which uses a load of discredited and fallacious arguments to attempt to disprove the reality of climate change, but which only succeeds in convincing this reader that his best work was written in the 1960s. What do you do when a fictional work takes a position you like? Call it journalism, of course! That's what the American Association of Petroleum Geologists have done. The AAPG have given Crichton their journalism award this year:

"It is fiction," conceded Larry Nation, communications director for the association. "But it has the absolute ring of truth."

That sounds like truthiness to me.

More after the jump


Unlike the AAPG, who are hardly going to be the most objective bunch when it comes to this topic, State of Fear is widely reviled amongst the rest of the scientific community:
The book is "demonstrably garbage," Stephen H. Schneider, a Stanford climatologist, said in an interview yesterday. Petroleum geologists may like it, he said, but only because "they are ideologically connected to their product, which fills up the gas tanks of Hummers."

Daniel P. Schrag, a geochemist who directs the Harvard University Center for the Environment, called the award "a total embarrassment" that he said "reflects the politics of the oil industry and a lack of professionalism" on the association's part.

As for the book, he added, "I think it is unfortunate when somebody who has the audience that Crichton has shows such profound ignorance."


snip


http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2006/2/9/2815

[Blue_Tires]

23. glad to see some real scientists speak out

[rodeodance]

30. "The book is "demonstrably garbage," ...

from your post:
That sounds like truthiness to me.

More after the jump


Unlike the AAPG, who are hardly going to be the most objective bunch when it comes to this topic, State of Fear is widely reviled amongst the rest of the scientific community:
The book is "demonstrably garbage," Stephen H. Schneider, a Stanford climatologist, said in an interview yesterday. Petroleum geologists may like it, he said, but only because "they are ideologically connected to their product, which fills up the gas tanks of Hummers."

Daniel P. Schrag, a geochemist who directs the Harvard University Center for the Environment, called the award "a total embarrassment" that he said "reflects the politics of the oil industry and a lack of professionalism" on the association's part.

As for the book, he added, "I think it is unfortunate when somebody who has the audience that Crichton has shows such profound ignorance."

[rodeodance]

31. the book "reflects the politics of the oil industry "

[DrRang]

40. Had fun reviewing "State of Crap" a year ago, see below

This review I wrote was published in Albuquerque's Weekly Alibi, the same paper that ran the Laura Berg letter.

An old-time kid’s joke goes, “God is love. Love is blind. Ray Charles is blind. Therefore Ray Charles is God.” Michael Crichton’s polemic-as-novel, State of Fear, displays equally rigorous logic.
Crichton’s central theme holds that theories such as eugenics, once accepted by many people as scientifically sound, turned out to be incorrect. Therefore global warming theory is probably incorrect too.
If written by an unknown author, State of Fear would be just another clunky thriller and we wouldn’t be talking about it. But Crichton has shaped the book as a manifesto against anyone who takes global warming seriously, and his status as a popularizer of dubious science guarantees this 600-page doorstop will receive wide exposure.
State of Fear is marketed as a novel so let’s get characters, style and plot out of the way before tackling Crichton’s science project.
To call Crichton’s characters cartoonish would be an insult to Shrek and Lisa Simpson. The viewpoint character, naïve young lawyer Peter Evans, exists to have things explained to him and to provide a foil to super athlete, warrior, MIT honcho and insufferable know-it-all Richard John Kenner, apparently the author’s alter ego.
The book zigzags between adventuring and lecturing. The overbearing heroes lecture unsuspecting environmentalists with passages such as, “Have you ever heard of the geoid? No? The geoid is the equipotential surface of the earth’s gravitational field that approximates the mean sea surface. That help you?”
As for action scenes, ya gotta love the opener. A Callow Young Assistant working at a marine laboratory near Paris encounters a Sinister Asian Beauty hot to tour his tsunami-simulating laboratory. The SAB then lures the CYA to her apartment for a quickie, after which three goons burst in. They pin the CYA down on the bed and hold a cold, squishy baggie in his armpit so the tiny octopus inside can bite him, thus allowing the SAB to push the CYA into the Seine just as the octopus poison paralyzes him. This supremely silly scene delays Crichton’s festival of disinformation for a few pages, but it has little to do with the rest of the plot.
Yeah, the plot. Evil enviros are brainwashing the world with the bogus theory of global warming. To bolster their claims they secretly acquire high-tech equipment, hoping to trigger lightning storms and tsunamis to publicize a lawsuit brought by the inhabitants of the island of Vanutu against the United States for aggravating global warming. Their hit men drive a Prius. Far as I can tell, this isn’t meant as parody.
Crichton tries to have it three ways. Although marketed as a novel, State of Fear is presented as a scientific call to arms. Crichton scatters his usual graphs and odd fonts through the text, then tries to augment the appearance of authority with footnotes, an appendix, an author’s statement, and 20 pages of references annotated with praise for the works of climate skeptics. But Crichton has fudged the science to the point he’d be laughed off stage if he marketed the work as non-fiction.
To produce the endless misleading passages, Crichton uses several techniques repeatedly.
There’s the head fake. The main characters visit Iceland for an intense scene with a scientist who claims that his work has been suppressed because it shows that Iceland’s glaciers are actually growing, thus disproving global warming. Later a character mentions in passing that Iceland’s glaciers are anomalies, and Crichton finesses mention of shrinking glaciers.
Another technique is the dishonest edit, most egregiously deployed against the work of Dr. James E. Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. A character says Hansen’s 1988 study predicting rising temperatures caused by heat-trapping greenhouse gases was “wrong by 300 percent.”
Hansen’s study actually included three scenarios—a worst case scenario modeling the effect of exponential growth in gases, a more probable scenario of “business as usual,” and a scenario in which gases are dramatically reduced. Crichton portrays the worst case scenario as Hansen’s sole conclusion, without mentioning that Hansen’s “business as usual” scenario was right on target. In a Dec. 13 New York Times interview with Andrew C. Revkin, Hansen said, “Crichton has taken what is actually a triumph of climate science prediction and pretended that it is a failure.”
Repeatedly Crichton ignores conclusive data pointing in one direction to depict atypical, opposing data as the real story. Global average temperatures dropped about half a degree Fahrenheit between 1940 and 1970 before rising again steeply. Meanwhile atmospheric carbon dioxide steadily increased, which, according to Crichton, disproves the connection between rising CO2 and rising temperatures.
Not so fast. In a phone interview, Dr. David S. Gutzler of the University of New Mexico’s Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences said that other factors operated during the thirty-year period. First, temperature rises are less smooth and steady than the rise in CO2, so a one-to-one comparison really isn’t valid.
Second, during the mid-twentieth century, increased pollution in the form of air-borne particles temporarily counteracted the rise in temperature caused by CO2, thus lowering temperatures. When the United States and Europe enacted effective anti-pollution laws in the 1970s, pollution lessened and no longer masked the ongoing rise due to CO2.
Third, a slight variation in the brightness of the sun possibly lowered temperatures temporarily, a difficult factor to measure.
For a last sample, there’s the stuff Crichton just plain gets wrong. A character says, “Carbon dioxide has increased from 316 parts per million to 376 parts per million. Sixty parts per million is the total increase. Now, that’s such a small change in our entire atmosphere that it is hard to imagine.”
For starters, atmospheric carbon dioxide, extremely stable at about 275 parts per million (ppm) for millennia, has risen to over 375ppm in the last 150 years—a rise of about 100ppm instead of 60ppm. More importantly, very small changes in atmospheric components are disruptive. That’s why they’re measured in parts per million.
As for sins of omission, Crichton ignores vast amounts of data supporting global warming: warming ocean waters, the faster rise of nighttime low temperatures than of daytime highs, accelerated Arctic warming, the expected variation in regional effects, and disruption among heat-sensitive species.
That’s the brickbats, so now come the bouquets. (And I must disclose that I work with a climate change group.) Crichton’s screed may have done climate activists a favor. He relentlessly trots out characters that spout inane exaggerations about global warming, then brings in Kenner and his minions to debunk them. It’s a warning to environmentalists not to overstate how far damage has progressed, and a warning to use primary and secondary sources instead of carelessly repeating the exaggerations of a media usually uninterested in any threat that’s not killing Americans on camera.
For those who want to know more about global climate change but don’t want to slog through this deeply silly and dishonest book, www.realclimate.org, a site maintained by climate scientists, covers the topic in general and currently is focusing on refuting many of Crichton’s assertions.
For the more seriously interested, UNM regularly offers David Gutzler’s Global Climate Change class, although it will likely be filled for the 2005 spring semester by the time this is published.

[DemBones DemBones]

48. Thanks for your detailed post about the

novel and about climate change. I'm going to repost the URL you gave as a clickable link for DUer's convenience:

http:www.realclimate.org

[SoCalDem]

15. Bush is a cretin.. what would we expect?

Creighton is a stooge whose success has obviously gone to his head:puke:

[daleo]

16. I remember reading The Andromeda Strain back in high school

That seemed to make a lot of sense. I don't know what the hell happened to Chrichton since then.

[aquart]

26. He got rich enough to be stupid.

When you have a fortune to make, you need your brains.

[DemBones DemBones]

50. Your thought processes are likely a good bit more sophisticated now

than when you were in high school, too.

But I'd wager, though I haven't read more than two or three of his novels, that Crichton has likely fallen into the pattern that so many bestselling writers have. They get fat contracts to churn out a book or two a year and their plots suffer because they have to crank out the words too fast. Often you get to page 200, say, and suddenly the author attempts to wrap up all the subplots in 25 or 30 pages, meeting the specs of the contract for number of pages but leaving the reader disappointed that the author just cut the story off and tacked on a clumsy ending. I have a little list of bestselling authors I no longer read for that very reason.

[bobbieinok]

18. Rising Sun--fear of evil Japanese and Disclosure--woman sexually

harasses male subordinate

Rising Sun played into the US popular fear of the Japanese beating the US economically

Disclosure (from what I gathered from the reactions to the book and movie) essentially trivialized the issue of sexual harassment by 'getting off' on a man being sexually pursued by his female boss

Crichton in these 2 books and the one vs global warming seems to enjoy making $$$ by playing into the conservatives' view of the world

[Marie26]

21. Bingo

I used to like Michael Chricton, but stopped reading him once I couldn't ignore the misogynistic undertones in his writing anymore. There's a real theme of "white male persecution" that runs throughout his novels in various forms.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

32. Disclosure, yuck...the aggressive career woman tries to ruin the man

who has the happy, little stay-at-home wife...shades of Fatal Attraction, with, guess who, Michael Douglas as the hapless man who is the hapless target of these women.

I've been a stay-at-home mom, when my daughter was very young, so I'm not at all disparaging that role. However, Hollywood continues to trot out the "evil" working woman against the "angelic" stay-at-home mom, which does nothing but perpetuate a myth and divide women against themselves. MKJ

[yurbud]

19. bush hasn't avidly read anything ever

[Marie26]

20. That says whole lot

Bush avidly reads a book of fiction because it tells him what he wants to hear, then he adopts it as absolute fact. Oil companies nominate fiction for their journalism award cause they can't find any facts to support their cause. The establishment adopts fake fictional view and ignores reality slowly dissolving around them. They follow the same deluded pattern from Iraq's WMDs to global warming and haven't really let reality intrude yet.

[Strelnikov_]

24. OK. If He Is Now A Journalist/Scientist, Why Isn't He Worried

about the modern day 'Project Scoop'?

http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/details.html

Aren't you worried about the 'Andromeda Strain', Mike?

[Sequoia]

74. That's so funny, but you've got a point!!

[Azathoth]

25. I'm sorry to see that Crichton has sunk to this level

Of course Dubya will embrace any junk science he can find which furthers his political agenda, but I'm surprised to see Crichton -- a well-educated and very astute individual -- tumble so far down the rabbit hole. Questioning some of the global warming studies and statistics is understandable (many scientists do), but Crichton has really gone off the deep end, equating all environmentalists with religious fundamentalists and adopting a stance on the environment that is to the right of the average Exxon lobbyist. It's sad to watch a guy go from writing books like Jurassic Park to writing unoriginal anecdotes for the Rush Limbaugh show.

[rodeodance]

27. Its a novel-- What is fact and what is fiction--and can Jr tell the differ

ance?--and he is making policy based on a novel?

[rodeodance]

28. and Mr. Fred Barnes gets a jab on his writing style from WH. oh ho

....."This shows the president is more interested in science fiction than science," Frank O'Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, said after learning of the White House meeting. Mr. O'Donnell's group monitors environmental policy.

"This administration has put no limit on global warming pollution and has consistently rebuffed any suggestion to do so," he said.

Not so, according to the White House, which said Mr. Barnes's book left a false impression of Mr. Bush's views on global warming.

Michele St. Martin, a spokeswoman for the Council on Environmental Quality, a White House advisory agency, pointed to several speeches in which Mr. Bush had acknowledged the impact of global warming and the need to confront it, even if he questioned the degree to which humans contribute to it.

[Ilsa]

33. Isn't Crichton a medical doctor? He's no expert on environmental science.

Would Bush and Cheney want their annual physicals reviewed by PhDs in Mathematics?

People shouldn't make themselves out to be experts in other fields the way Crichton has.

[1932]

34. First thought: how much $$$ is that "journalism" award worth?

[humus]

36. a bit OT

April 8th, Joint International GM Opposition Day
http://www.indybay.org/news/2006/02/1802198.php

*5 April : March for GMO-free regionsduring the GMO European Conference
held in Vienna, Austria.
*6 April :National Call-In Day to the US Congress, in support of the
"Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act,USA
*8 April : JIGMOD, Earth

8th of April 2006: Joint International GM Opposition Day (JIGMOD)

The World Trade Organization (WTO) -- whose Deputy Director General
previously served as the European general counsel for the agrochemical
and biotechnology giant Monsanto -- has ruled in favor of genetically
modified (GM) crop producers against the European Union (EU).
International critics of GMOs (genetically modified organisms) are
confident that European citizens remain opposed, and that GMOs will not
significantly break into the European market. However, they are
concerned that it will open the way to the development of GM crops, as
well as the contamination of both GM-free fields and food chains.
Furthermore, the WTO is thus dictating a message to the world that it
is
useless to attempt to regulate GMOs.

In this context, 100 international organizations from more than 40
countries are now announcing April 8, 2006 as a Joint International
GM Opposition Day. The day will feature major public events in several
of these countries to demonstrate continuing global opposition to
genetically modified foods and crops.

“This international day follows the WTO decision to restrain European
governments from protecting their farmers and other citizens from the
threat of GMOs," explained one of the US promoters of the event. We
will
join with our allies around the world to condemn the WTO decision, and
to denounce the US administration's attempts to impose this hazardous
technology on us all.”

On the 8th of April, "Information Sites" distributed worldwide will
allow the general public to learn more about the social, scientific,
environmental and health dimensions of the GMO file. Some of these
sites
will be linked through a video-conference that will provide a forum for
GM opponents to dialog across the world, including the historical
figures of the movement. A letter, written by a team of scientists and
others, which emphasizes health risksand problems of genetically
engineered organisms, will notably be presented during this
conference.A
public demonstration will occur in Chicago, USA, where the
biotechnology
industry is holding its annual convention. A promotion of "peasant
seeds," as the pre-existing alternative to GM crops, will be launched
in
several countries. Among other joint initiatives, a NO-to-GMO Mosaic
composed of pieces originating from many regions of the world will be
exhibited in Turkey. Concerts, movies, discovery walks and peasant
markets will accompany exhibitions by sponsoring organizations.

"We are concerned about our quality of life, and want to prevent our
farms and our dinner plates from being touched by GMOs," said Dominique
BEroule, of the JIGMOD Coordinating Team in France. For ten years,
organizations worldwide have followed parallel and complementary tracks
toward this goal. Now, whereas the WTO intervenes to extend the GMO
market and suppress protective regulations, environmentalists, farmers,
and consumer organizations are joining in to inform the public of the
increasing evidence against genetically modified crops and food, on the
occasion of a worldwide appointment."

"The more people learn about the hazards of GMOs for our health, the
environment, and traditional agricultural communities, the more they
oppose this technology," explained Brian Tokar, of the US-based
Institute for Social Ecology. "And in many countries, this concern has
been translated into sound public policies to limit the importation and
growing of GM products. That is why corporations work to suppress
public
awareness in the US, and why our government has pressed theWTO to
overrule sound protective actions in other countries."

"The countries that have adopted GM are facing higher costs and market
rejection which is why they want to force the GM problem on other
competitive countries. Farmers want to market what consumers want, and
it is not GM. Contamination is not controllable and economic loss will
occur but it should be the GM companies, not the non-GM farmers, that
should be forced to accept the liability for the losses GM crops will
cause." said Julie Newman, of the Australian Network of Concerned
Farmers.

According to Ignacio Chapela, microbial ecologist and Professor at the
University of California (Berkeley), "We want to make sure that GMOs
are
not released into the environment without public transparency and
informed consent, but to recognize that some manipulations of organisms
might be useful, provided there is a high degree of public
responsibility and technical capacity to ensure that they do not come
out of a laboratory."

Dr Arpad Pusztai, who pioneered research on the nutritional and
developmental impacts of transgenic food, declares:"Will the biotech
company executives pushing GM crops on an unwilling public be able to
face their own children and grandchildren when the health damage and
environmental dangers of GM crops will come true?"

Events during the period leading up to the 8th of April include:

o 24 February :Conference of the European GM-free regions, 24 February,
in Krakow, Poland.
o 3 March :National demonstrations in several towns of Germany

o 5 April : March for GMO-free regionsduring the GMO European
Conference
held in Vienna, Austria.
o 6 April :National Call-In Day to the US Congress, in support of the
"Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act,USA
o 8 April : JIGMOD, Earth

The full program and complete list of sponsors will be updated until
the
8th of April on the dedicated website:http://altercampagne.free.fr/

altercampagne.free.fr/

[PA Democrat]

37. Bush's entire domestic and foreign policies are based upon fiction

rather than fact. Supply-side economics will raise the standard of living for the middle class and poor, Saddam has reconstituted his nuclear program and has vast stores of WMD's, Iraq's oil will pay for the reconstruction of Iraq, Social Security privatization will save the system, Bush's budget will cut the deficit in half by 20xx (the time line is constantly being pushed back).

I could go on and on. This story confirms what we already suspected: Bush's policies are based upon science fiction and fairy tales.

[DamnYank]

38. Crichton's qualifications as an authority on this topic

are what, exactly? A medical doctor who hasn't practiced medicine in decades and who makes his living writing science fiction and Hollywood screenplays. And he gets to testify before Congress because of what? Money, connections, fame, all of the above? How about talking with the real experts and having them testify before Congress.

[hedgehog]

41. I've been suspicious of Crichton since "Terminal Man"

I was utterly appalled that a graduate of Harvard Medical School would portray epileptics as criminal monsters. Remember, people just didn't have the info then that they do now and there may still have been laws on the books in some states preventing epileptics from getting marriage licenses or worse. That book was totally irresponsible. The amazing thing is that on his official web site, Crichton prides himself on that book. He thought that surgery involving the "implantation of electrodes" was horrific and he wanted it stopped. Too bad he didn't talk to some of the people with uncontrollable seizures before he wrote his book. Makes me wonder if he slept through all his classes at Harvard.

[Warren Stupidity]

42. Novel suggest global cat. climate change unproven. nt.

[Joey Liberal]

43. Fred Barnes is a JERK n.t

[eppur_se_muova]

45. I wouldn't regard Crighton as a "mainstream" SF author.

As little as that term means -- SF authors are like jazz musicians, try to categorize them, or tell them what "is" or "isn't" SF and they'll bite you. Still, Crighton is more of a "Best-seller" author than a real SF author. Try reading more typical SF (oxymoron, acknowledged) and you'll find an awful lot of current SF authors -- many of whom are PRACTICING scientists, unlike Crighton -- take the basis of their stories to be the end result of global warming, or other environmental catastrophe such as ozone depletion, accepted as all-too-real possibilities by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community.

A good antidote to Crighton's book would be Kim Stanley Robinson's "Forty Signs of Rain", given top reviews by the Guardian, Independent and NY Times Review of Books. The President in this novel is described as follows: "It was a pastime in some circles to judge just how much of a dimwit the President was, how much of a performing puppet for the people manipulating him; but facing him in person, Charlie felt instantly confirmed in his minority position that the man had such a huge amount of low cunning that it amounted to a sort of genius." Is KSR a charter member of the reality-based community, or what?

edited to add quote

[Baconfoot]

46. It's true.SciFi fans don't like Crighton.Try Baxter's "Transcendent" NT

[eppur_se_muova]

49. Soon! I recently finished "Coalescent".

Maybe we should start a Science Fiction DG? It could be a forum for truly individualistic, crotchety, opinionated DUers to argue endlessly over obscure points of interest to themselves only, like ... well ... most of the other DG's.:evilgrin:

[Solon]

52. Have you heard of Alastair Reynolds?

Baxter seems a little far out to me, at least in some cases, like the book you mention, and the other books, like Manifold: Space, Manifold: Time, Manifold: Origin. They just seem a little heavy handed to me. I like "hard" Science Fiction, and even "Ultra-hard"(Science fiction based on CURRENT technologies, nothing theoritical, thank Gods they finally invented Carbon-fibre nano tubes, now my novel will fit into this category:)). Alastair Reynolds is an Astronomer, which is cool as all hell, and he's not a bad writer either.

[eppur_se_muova]

55. Yep. Read the trilogy plus "Chasm City". Starting "Diamond Dogs" soon.

Agree Baxter's stuff goes too far out there sometimes. It's not like *every* story has to include the end of the entire universe, or even an infinite collection of them! It's sort of like Benford's stuff -- staggering ideas, but ridden too hard. Although his "Titan" is based on current technology -- taking a Space Shuttle to Titan!

I'd love to see another Iain Banks novel based in "The Culture". Lord knows he may have burned himself out writing those. But "Consider Phlebas" had more packed into it than a good trilogy would.

Have you read any of Sean McMullen's Calculor series? (Had to mention someone outside of the "killer B's"!)

[Solon]

56. No, haven't read McMullen, I'll check him out...

One thing I find, as a weakness, of sorts, with SciFi writers, especially Benford, but even Clarke(Space Christers?) is cultural and religious development of their characters and worlds they create. Then again, there are Mormons, and some other stuff that humans make up that are somewhat ridiculous, but much of it seems quite unrealistic in their novels. Alastair Reynolds has characters and worlds that seem, for all the fantastic natures of them, are actually relatable to real life situations. From wars over resources, to prejudice and criminal syndicates, they seem to be at least realistic in the ways that we understand.

[eppur_se_muova]

57. McMullen's "Librarians" are a sort of elite priesthood, and...

settle disputes by mortal combat. Very "relatable to real life situations"! :D (But then he's an Aussie, maybe that's the way things are done down there.)

If you like strong characters, try Jack McDevitt (sp?). I've been mildly disappointed in only a couple of his books. His characters are clearly recognizable as "people like us", just facing otherworldly situations and dealing with them as best they can. Which is how Gene Roddenberry thought of "Star Trek", BTW.

Maybe I should go to Books: Fiction and start an "Official Real SF Thread"? DU may never be the same again!

[Solon]

58. Ugh, I swear, they talk almost exclusively of harry potter and...

stuff down there. I say do it, but let's make sure that we don't beat around the bush, whoever mentions L. Ron Hubbard gets their ass beat in that thread, you KNOW someone will be a smartass and mention him.

[eppur_se_muova]

67. OK by me. JOOC, did they ever find him, or his remains?

(I read the story about his "wager" with John Campbell, Jr., so I was never even tempted to read his stuff. AS IF those cheezy titles & cover art weren't warning enough!)

I looked over some of the other titles in the Books:Fiction DG, and I just have to say: eewwww eewwww eewwww eewwww eewwww ...

[0007]

51. This kind of stupidity is right down junior's alley.

Fred Barns & Michael Crichton are two first class bona fided government stamped morons.

[mvd]

53. Next thing you know

Crichton will be one of Bush's appointed "scientists." That's how ignorant of science they are.

[WindRavenX]

59. so does Mr.Crichton hold a degree in science?

No one has answered this in the thread, so I'd thought I'd ask it again.

[Toucano]

62. From his official biography

He holds a degree in medicine.

He also has studied anthropology and biology.

No geology or earth sciences are acknowledged.

[kwolf68]

64. Studied Biology?

If he's a MD he may have gotten his BS in Biology. Even if he got a Masters if Biology (of which I am currently working on), it would still NOT make him qualified on the topic of global climate change.

[Toucano]

65. His bio describes it as...

"...post-doctoral fellow at the Salk Institute for Biological Sciences, La Jolla, California 1969-1970." It doesn't specify the field, but Wikipedia says Anthropology and Medicine only.

Either way, he's unqualified, but who in the Bush administration is? It's sort of their prerequisite.

[rodeodance]

60. Bush takes fictionous novel to be the TRUTH--better headline

[Toucano]

61. Great. A second-rate writer of fiction with no scientific training

in climate or geology is advising the government on climate and geology.

Everything in the administration is based on fiction.

[Toucano]

63. AND he's an admitted plagiarist.

Seems perfectly matched to the Bush team.

[Viking12]

66. AND he believes in "psychic spoon-bending"

That in itself should tell you all you need to know...

[Plaid Adder]

68. You know, I would never take scientific advice from the guy who wrote

_The Andromeda Strain._

But maybe that's just me.

"Hey, don't worry about that deadly airborne contagious virus, George! It'll eventually mutate into something perfectly harmless."

Sigh,

The Plaid Adder

[tanyev]

69. Next Supreme Court vacancy: Judge Judy.

"That gal does a bang-up job on her TV show. She really knows her stuff."

[Earth_First]

70. "American Association of Petroleum Geologists' annual journalism award"

I am sure that's a nonpartisan award... :eyes:

[winston61]

71. Flush Limbaugh

was just raving on about this. Now, get this. According to Rush mankind is just too stupid and too limited to be able to comprehend science and life structure. Our tiny minds cannot grasp the magnitude of the natural world. Since we have no grasp of nature and science we can't anything to alter or destroy it. We can't save the world and we can't destroy the world. So does Rush mean that all science departments in universities and governments should just shut down and go home? Is he saying that since we have no grasp of life that all advances in science and medicine do not exist? Did science not develop the drugs he was addicted to? Did science not develop the device that gave him back his hearing after drugs destroyed it? Do all the children created through in-vitro really not exist? Are they just figments of the parents' imagination? Is mankind really not pouring hydrocarbons waste into the atmosphere? Is it glade air freshener coming out of our tailpipes?

Do the ditto heads just listen and not examine what this guy is saying? If what rush says is true then mankind would have died out billions of years ago. How would we have developed agriculture? If man could not connect the dots to adjust to basic survival how did we last this long? Truly nuts.

[wordpix2]

78. Limpballs is an ass & I'll bet he's on BushCo payroll. Anyone know

who his station's owner is?

[Rex]

72. Just another reason why

we are so fucked!

[wordpix2]

76. I returned to the Canadian Rockies last year after nearly 20 yrs. away

and the Icefields are definitely receding. The most visited glacier along the Icefields Parkway receded 1/2 mile or so in that time, with date markers posted along the trail to the toe of the glacier.

[DrunkenMaster]

77. the story being missed here

is that Crichton was given a "journalist of the year" award by the petrochemical companies. If there was EVER any doubt that we are living in a "virtual" reality created by the lies of a ubiquitous corporate media, this pretty much kills it.

[Dr Fate]

79. A guy who writes children's dinosaur movies? n/t

n/t