I hardly ever pimp my blog at Wizbang, but I DO have a post at IMAO that talks about this ;0)
With “real” pictures and everything.
EarlOctober 3, 2006
Seriously. Any use of a work of fiction as a point of reference for the question of global warming is totally ridiculous.
MitchellOctober 3, 2006
Earl, that’s a crock.
If you had actually read the book, you would see a lengthy bibliography of scientific literature on the topic, and a separate “prologue” in which the author gives his own opinion re global warming.
The work of fiction is separate from these two elements. Given his research on the topic, I am inclined to listen to Crichton before I’d take Miles O’Brien’s view of things.
EarlOctober 3, 2006
Yes, I’ve seen the “lengthy bibliography of scientific literature on the topic.” But unlike you, apparently, I’m also aware of plenty of complaints of that Crichton misrepresented plenty of the scientific work. (Here’s an example.)
Hate to break it to you, but you’re doing exactly what Crichton hoped you would do – take his word for it, without actually studying any of the evidence yourself.
MitchellOctober 4, 2006
I’m with Crichton until we get more transparency in funding and in the bias that runs deep in the debate.
Right now, it’s like a trial, where any hired gun can show up and contradict the other side.
This post reminded me of this clip, citing the popularity of a fictional television program as being a “national referendum supporting torture”.
Lorie,
I hardly ever pimp my blog at Wizbang, but I DO have a post at IMAO that talks about this ;0)
With “real” pictures and everything.
Seriously. Any use of a work of fiction as a point of reference for the question of global warming is totally ridiculous.
Earl, that’s a crock.
If you had actually read the book, you would see a lengthy bibliography of scientific literature on the topic, and a separate “prologue” in which the author gives his own opinion re global warming.
The work of fiction is separate from these two elements. Given his research on the topic, I am inclined to listen to Crichton before I’d take Miles O’Brien’s view of things.
Yes, I’ve seen the “lengthy bibliography of scientific literature on the topic.” But unlike you, apparently, I’m also aware of plenty of complaints of that Crichton misrepresented plenty of the scientific work. (Here’s an example.)
Hate to break it to you, but you’re doing exactly what Crichton hoped you would do – take his word for it, without actually studying any of the evidence yourself.
I’m with Crichton until we get more transparency in funding and in the bias that runs deep in the debate.
Right now, it’s like a trial, where any hired gun can show up and contradict the other side.