There are several ways to read Michael Crichton’s new book “State of Fear.” The easy (and least satisfactory) way is to read it as just a thriller. Read this way it’s an easy-to-follow tale of eco-terrorists vs. scientists. The eco-terrorists plan a series of horrific “events” to punctuate their thesis: global warming is destroying the Earth. The scientists are not so sure about this thesis and plan to stop them.
The action moves from Antarctica to the desert southwest to the South Pacific and involves giant icebergs, tsunamis and some really bad weather. There is only one plot twist and it is VERY easy to figure out (who’s coughing?). The eco-terrorists, for the most part, fare poorly.
This is almost, but not quite, a work of fiction. The author says in the introduction “the book is fiction but the footnotes are real.”
Footnotes? In a novel? A bit unusual, but they are scattered throughout the book citing references to a variety of scientific themes pertinent to the story. I looked them up and they are, indeed, real. You don’t have to search the references to enjoy the book; they simply serve to verify Crichton’s assertions.
A better way to read the book is to peruse the footnotes along with the story. This is especially important if you believe everything you read in the press and watch on TV regarding global warming.
“Sure seems warmer these days, must be global warming” is an all too common reaction by the factually deficient media and a gullible public. Since it “seems warmer” and thus “must be global warming,” it’s not much of a leap to conclude “and this is caused by mankind, particularly SUV-driving Americans.” Even a quick read of the footnotes should be enough to convince anyone that some, if not most, of the hoopla about global warming is just that.
Perhaps the best way to read the book is to breeze through the narrative but pay attention to the underlying theme. This theme is pretty clear: to merely state something as fact does not make it true. Too much of what we see and hear from the media today is hyperbole, not scientific evidence. Too many agenda-driven pundits are given disproportionate time and ink in pursuit of their own self interests. Not everything is a “catastrophe,” but fear sells better to the uninformed.
Supporters of global warming as the cause of all climatic change will hate the book and revile the author. Those that extol global warming as a myth will cheer.
The book does seem to come down against the global warming crowd, but in my opinion that is really not the point. The point is that bad science, promoted by any faction, serves no good purpose.
Underneath the techno-thriller story is a simple plea: stop lying and quit distorting data to sell your pet theory to get more funding. This goes for everybody. As an example, there is simply no way anyone can predict what will happen a year from now let alone 100 years from now. Adequate funding to support unbiased scientific research that is thoroughly peer-reviewed and honestly reported would better serve policy makers and the public.
