THE CRICHTON CRISIS

Michael fully fleshes out his lecture with loads of links and references to science, history, and research, not opinion.

Check out FEAR, COMPLEXITY, & ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN THE 21st CENTURY.

If you are afraid to read what Michael Crichton has to say, (perhaps you've been told to ignore Crichton because he's evil, or successful, or what-not) that's okay. There are hundreds of non-scientists who have smeared Michael simply because he IS a scientist (and of course, scientists are evil; they are responsible for all of our environmental problems; and make monsters in their labs at night). One of the most vocal of Crichton's detractors is David Roberts, a self-admitted Philosophy major drop-out, who runs his website Grist Magazine, which is an environmental news and commentary site.

Another Crichton detractor is Chris Mooney (The Republican War On Science). Now you don't need to have a diploma to have an informed opinion, but Chris is proud to say that he got his diploma from Yale: oddly enough, he's cagey about saying just what his diploma was for (Science? Climatology? American Clown History?). Chris Mooney also doesn't like Crichton. Again, he is cagey as to saying exactly why. I mean, he'll tell you why Crichton is all manner of vulgar epithets, but he won't say why (other than it's just his opinion, so there!) On his latest blog, Chris quotes a favorite passage from Fred Barnes new book, Rebel-In-Chief:

"The president later provoked worldwide protests when he formally withdrew the United States from the Kyoto global warming treaty. The environmental lobby in this country fumed, but Bush didn't flinch. The treaty had never been ratified and stood little chance of winning Senate approval. Though he didn't say so publicly, Bush is a dissenter on the theory of global warming. To the extent it's a problem, Bush believes it can be solved by technology. He avidly read Michael Crichton's 2004 novel State of Fear, whose villain falsifies scientific studies to justify draconian steps to curb global warming. Crichton himself has studied the issue extensively and concluded that global warming is an unproven theory and that the threat is vastly overstated."

Mooney finds this outrageous.

Actually, Chris outrages very easily.~

Here is the thing about Crichton's STATE OF FEAR: It was published in 2004. The same year Bush read it. Bush didn't have his meeting with Crichton until 2005*. Chris, who is a news journalist and has full access to White House press releases, never cared until he stumbled over the reference in Fred Barnes book. So almost a year after the fact, it's news! As you'll see in his blog, Chris also makes the allusion that this meeting was important because Crichton's fictional scenario influenced Bush's belief that man-made global warming was unsupported by science (which it is). What makes that odd is the fact that Bush refused to sign the accord back in 2001. Chris also claims to be a skeptic and writes at csicop.org. That's some pretty faith-based skepticism, there Chris!

Now Mooney is creating the conspiracy theory (well, more of an hypothesis - er - baseless assumption anyone?) that the White House tried to keep Crichton's visit secret!

Secret because Crichton is a ... um ... terrorist? Colonialist? Slave trader? What? What is it about Michael Crichton that calls for a red flag warning?

When did Crichton become a dangerous "person of interest" that commanded a far louder alert to the media whenever he met with the president (which apparently was only one time and for about an hour)? Mooney makes his living off of playing the Fear Card (like Kevin Trudeau, Mooney has a very successful shtick and he's shtickin' to it) Mooney also claims that Bush kept his real opinions of Global Warming a secret! The Hell? Since when?

No he didn't (Bush) and no they didn't (White House)! Barnes got his info on the visit from the standard White House press releases. What's more, Mooney has full access to those releases - same as everyone else. Its just that, back in 2005, he didn't care! He cares now because Barnes (who likes Bush) mentions it in his book.

Anyone who is a journalist, a Washington correspondent, and a senior correspondent for a major publication like The American Prospect, and is THIS uninformed (and too busy to even do a quick search to verify his facts) is a person who, regardless of his diploma, shouldn't be even attempting to have an opinion. Let alone trying to pass his fuzzy ideas off as informed. Then again, 2005 and 2006 has amply demonstrated that publishers aren't too keen on fact checking their authors.

Oh well. So NOW its a White House cover-up, which makes me quake in fear as to what writer or artist Bush might be meeting with

THIS

VERY

MINUTE!

Oh God! He could be talking to Brett Favre!

*
FOR NEWS PURPOSES -

What other Scientists think
Real Climate
The writer is Gavin A. Schmidt, a global warming promoter who is a Climate modeler at NASA and has a Ph.D in mathematics from University College London.

Junk Science
The writer is Steve Milloy, a global warming debunker who has a B.A. in Natural Sciences from the Johns Hopkins University, a Master of Health Sciences in Biostatistics from the Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health, a Juris Doctorate from the University of Baltimore, and a Master of Laws from the Georgetown University Law Center.

From today's entry at Chris Mooney's Blog

The Full Barnes Treatment of Bush and Crichton

Category: Global Warming
My copy of Rebel-in-Chief just arrived, and I can now quote you exactly what the book says about Bush's views on global warming, and his meeting with Michael Crichton. From p. 22-23:

The president later provoked worldwide protests when he formally withdrew the United States from the Kyoto global warming treaty. The environmental lobby in this country fumed, but Bush didn't flinch. The treaty had never been ratified and stood little chance of winning Senate approval. Though he didn't say so publicly, Bush is a dissenter on the theory of global warming. To the extent it's a problem, Bush believes it can be solved by technology. He avidly read Michael Crichton's 2004 novel State of Fear, whose villain falsifies scientific studies to justify draconian steps to curb global warming. Crichton himself has studied the issue extensively and concluded that global warming is an unproven theory and that the threat is vastly overstated. Early in 2005, political adviser Karl Rove arranged for Crichton to meet with Bush at the White House. They talked for an hour and were in near-total agreement. The visit was not made public for fear of outraging environmentalists all the more.

It's hard to decide what's the bigger outrage here:
1) That Bush didn't tell the public his real "dissenter" view on global warming; or
2) that Karl Rove set up a secret science advisory session for the president with (a scientist who is also) a novelist. In any case, in this story we see several strong tendencies of this administration going hand in hand: A penchant for secrecy, an unwillingness to level with the public, and a disdain for science.

E.C.McMullen Jr. article first posted on February 20, 2006

END