re: #49 robdouth

Again I’m being very specific about the research he sites (the back part of the book is a number of pages pointing to research, and the foreword he wrote where he talked about what he called the “hype” of AGW. I’m not saying he was accurate in the book, I’m pointing specifically to the research he provided. Was he just duped?

State of Fear was filled with cites to the research that backed many of the plot points in the novel. I don’t remember ever reading another fiction novel that did that as thoroughly as Crichton did there. That being said however, it is likely that he was citing specifically in favor of the viewpoint he wanted to put forth. It might be an interesting exercise to go back and see which of the references have since been disproved, or at least effectively argued against. The roughly 5 years since it was published have seen significant advancement in the science, even if it is not being effectively disseminated by a media that would rather focus on the controversial and extreme.

Maybe some AGW advocates (the ones with the actual scientific backgrounds, not Leo or Al) should hire pretty starlets to prance around in bikinis or sans clothing saying that soon, this is all they will need to wear, ala PETA and their fur campaign. That would make the news whenever sweeps came around.