Dear Mr. Madsen,
‘State of Fear’ is a work of fiction, you reactionary dolt. It isn’t like Crichton is pretending this is a documentary, or something.
Get a Grip
by John Cole| 17 Comments
This post is in: Democratic Stupidity
Get a Grip
Reader Interactions
17Comments
Comments are closed.
came from Daou
This is kind of funny, because George Will just wrote a column a couple of weeks ago that suggested the book somehow illustrated that global warming was a sham.
M. Scott Eiland
I shudder to think of the reaction this Masden twit had to Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six, where insane environmentalists tried to exterminate 99.9% of the population of the Earth with uber-Ebola. Why do I have a feeling he’d be just fine if the plot involved similar misdeeds by someone out to make a buck, rather than his beloved environmentalists?
Sandi
I read the George Will column you mention, but he didn’t say Crichton’s book illustrated that global warming was a sham. Nor has Michael Crichton said it was a sham. This is the problem with the whole global warming discussion, filtering your own beliefs into the writing and theories of others.
A cople of the things Will said about Crichton’s “State of Fear” are:
Chrichton doesn’t say there is no global warming, he says we do not know to what extent, what the cause is, or what comtributions man makes to it.
There are numerous theories why greenhouse gases are increasing; increasing cloud cover, ocean conveybelt ocean current slowing, rise in ocean levels for a number of reasons, volcanic contributions, etc. We have very much data, but it cannot be quantified in anyway useful for computer modeling.
As I said in a recent post I ran “Global Warming: The New Religion” The way I see it global warming may be coming. But if it is, then there probably isn’t much we can do to prevent it, although we should continue to vigorously study it.
I don’t know how much that man contributes, and science doesn’t either. It’s just another theory among many, and I suppose many of the theories have merit, and make up the big climate picture. Fitting human caused contributions into the bigger climate picture is not easy because “climate science” lacks any central theory to make sense of what’s happening.
For my two cents I believe that our money would be much better spend studying and preparing for it than trying to prevent what we yet don’t understand.
One of Crichton’s best statements:
Oh, and another reason for *eye rolling* “Eskimo Filing Against US Just Tip of Legal Iceberg“
M. Scott Eiland
If we ever do see that one killer asteroid coming at us, the first step should be to lock every lawsuit-filing environmentalist twit and their lawyers in a deep, dark dungeon until either the danger is eliminated or we all buy the farm. That’s a homeland security policy I could get behind.
came from Daou
How is Will’s article entitled, “Global Warming? Hot Air.” (where he uses Chrition’s fictional illustrations to further his opinion that global warming is a sham), NOT “filtering your own beliefs into [sic] the writing and theories of others”?
Will’s obviously a much better writer than the author of the pittsburglive.com article, but he’s doing the exact same thing for the other side of the arguement. He’s just not beating the reader over the head with it.
At least be honest enough to call a spade a spade.
Sandi
Where did George Will or Michael Crichton say that global warming was a sham? That is my objection.
What I see is Crichton pointing out, through reviews of the book (I am ordering it), and other writings of his, is that we lack data to make a conclusion, and rightfully deriding the inconclusive data as poor evidence that man is a major cause.
That is not calling global warming a sham.
Ralph Gizzip
Do you think increased solar activity could lead to global warming? After all, it’s solar energy that heats this big blue marble int he first place. This is an interesting read.
M. Scott Eiland
“Do you think increased solar activity could lead to global warming?”
This theory is well worth promoting, if for no other reason than to encourage lawsuit-prone environmentalists to head into space and try to serve a civil complaint on the misbehaving solar entity. ]:-)
tweell
Mars is experiencing a recent warming trend. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_ice-age_031208.html
Perhaps the Martians should look into a Kyoto treaty to deal with the problem.
tweell
M. Scott Eiland
Ah, Mars can just blame it on Halliburton. Or Michael Crichton.
Robert McClelland
CON-SERVATIVES IN ACTION
Behold the face of the modern conservative movement.
From Muslim persecutor, Daniel Pipes.
Lets extend Pipes’ logic. If searching for bigots, one looks only at the Reich Whinging Rube population. Hey, maybe he’s on to something.
From Pastor Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas.
Not surprisingly, the Reich Whingers, who issued a fatwa against James Wolcott a few months ago for making a sarcastic comment about cheering for the hurricanes that hit Florida, have suddenly gone silent when it comes to this bit of cheerleading for death by natural phenomenon. If for no other reason that they can’t kill the darkies themselves.
And finally, from the small dead mind of Kate McMillan.
I think what we really need are institutions to lock up con-servative whores like Kate who are obviously suffering from tertiary syphilis infections from their fathers.
For anyone who still wonders why Canadians recently chose to put the Liberals back in power, despite the many scandals surrounding them, the answer is because the alternative was people like this. Don’t think for an instant that the Conservative and Republican parties are not dominated by people who hold these exact same attitudes, because this is what you’ll get if you vote them into power, as we’ve all clearly seen happen in the vast wasteland south of our border.
narciso
Wayne Madsen, water carrier for Chavez and Castro’s conspiracies,
co author of America’s Nightmare;
heir to Sherman Skolnick, from
his perch at Op Ed News; a site
that makes Buzz News & Counterpunch
look moderate
Bruce
The article has no argument. It is just a bunch of ad hominem attacks. How is that an article? I can call people names too; will they publish me? I bet they would but only if I attack the right people… No logic required.
Daryl McCullough
Sandi writes: What I see is Crichton pointing out, through reviews of the book (I am ordering it), and other writings of his, is that we lack data to make a conclusion, and rightfully deriding the inconclusive data as poor evidence that man is a major cause.
Sandi, why do you believe that the data is inconclusive?
M. Scott Eiland
Ah, yes–Robert McDumbass charging in where even Kimmitt fears to tread. Very impressive–not.
Daryl McCullough
Sandi (quoting Crichton) writes: “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.”
This statement from Crichton is pretty silly. What he fails to acknowledge is the distinction between science and policy.
There is a sense in which science never reaches any definite conclusions—any theory we have could be overturned by the light of future evidence or by a future line of reasoning that nobody has thought of.
However, when it comes to policy, we have to make decisions in the presence of uncertainty. We can’t wait until there is zero doubt before acting.
Toren
“Science doesn’t really exist. Scientific beliefs are either proved wrong or else turn rapidly turn into engineering. Everything else is untested speculation.”
–James P. Hogan, “Kicking the Sacred Cow”