View Full Version : State of fear
mimilie
03-16-2005, 07:40 PM
State of Fear: Michael Crichton
I have just finished reading Micheal Crichton's latest novel, and strongly recommend it to anyone that is concerned about Global Warning. The author updates us on critical points on the realities of the phenomenon, the overestimates of human beliefs toward it, as well as innacuracies and misunderstandings caused by the media. Most arguments are supported by scientific publishings, research or articles. Very useful if you'd like to go deeper in the points provided.
Although this book might offend some environmentalists, you will find Mr. Crichton clarifies his points of view at the end of the novel.
xx Emma :blush:
subterranean
03-16-2005, 08:40 PM
Off topic..I just want to say : WELCOME....:wave:
interesting avatar :D
baddad
03-17-2005, 01:25 AM
Ditto!! Welcome. Always nice to see another Canadian on the forums...
mister_noel_y2k
03-17-2005, 05:28 AM
no offence but i heard that state of fear is just a piece of right wing propaganda where he says that global warming is made up and seems to undermine efforts to reduce the hole in the ozone layer. to me that seems just plain stupid.
i also think crichton is probably one of the worst writers ive ever read, jurassic park and congo were (beep).
:banana:
kilted exile
03-17-2005, 12:30 PM
If you liked that, you should probably read The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg.
I have not read State Of Fear, however I am assuming the basic premise for Crichton's argument is: The statistical data only shows increasing world temperatures, which is a process which has been going on at different stages in the history of the planet. He probably goes on to argue that this is bad science and to say that we are somehow influencing global warming cannot be claimed from this data. He would likely prefer us to not look for a variation of mean temperatures, but instead a variation of the variation as this would be more acceptable to him for linking human involvement to global warming. This is in fact a good argument.
However, where his argument falls down is that it does not take into effect the radient heat transfer caused by greenhouse gases, which traps heat from the suns rays nearer to the Earth's surface. (I will draw a diagram explaining this and attach it later.- Ok, diagrams drawn because at college currently did not have time to put them in Autocad, had to use Paint. You will also need to magnify to view them properly as they are shrunk to fit attachment file size.)
Oh and by the way welcome to the forum.
mimilie
03-19-2005, 08:47 AM
Thank you all for your opinions! I always like getting a point of view from the outside to help me understand what I'm reading.
xx
Emma
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.