I have made it known that I am not convinced that Global Warming is being truly real, being caused by man, or can be affected by anything we do. I have also said that, while I have those doubts, that is worth the effort to attack this beast, mythical or not, if for no other reason than to make the air more breathable.
A few years back, I attempted to read Michael Crichton’s State of Fear. Truth be told, I picked up the book without knowing anything about it, merely purchasing it because of the author. For the initiated, it is Michael Crichton’s novel attacking the argument of Global Warming. I never read the book to the end. Quite frankly, I found it pedantic to the extreme and it could not keep my attention.
I also found many of the facts, provable or not, to be one-sided. Ironically, as the novel pointed out, the facts being published by the advocates of Global Warming were also one-sided. I did find it interesting that the proponents of the Global Warming agenda fail to mention that the Antarctic is on a cooling trend while the Arctic is warming up, with an almost net zero effect in ice melt. BTW: I have confirmed this outside of the book.
I am not here to promote the book and at the end of the day, it is just a novel not a scientific paper. Also, I am given to understand there is a great deal of disagreement with some of the statements made in the book, which I, once again, am not planning to defend.
But some interesting side notes:
First, that learned scientist Al Gore (oh, he isn’t a scientist – my bad) said on March 21, 2007 before a U.S. House Committee: “The planet has a fever. If your baby has a fever, you go to the doctor … if your doctor tells you you need to intervene here, you don’t say ‘Well, I read a science fiction novel that tells me it’s not a problem’.” The obvious inference was to Michael Crichton’s State of Fear and, if not, something similar. But, he did not state why someone should give more credence to his credentials which are as least as suspect as Michael Crichton’s. After all Crichton had a science background, albeit in the medical field.
Second, if the Global Warming field is so hellbent on taking credibility from only those source who have a background that supports what they say I wonder how they can support that claim when they have made Greta Thunberg the face of their movement. Her scientific credentials are non-existent. She has looks, age, and passion; nothing else. If there is a greater level of hypocrisy more obvious than that, I do not know what it is. This has reduced the Global Warming movement to a circus side-show, leaving science in the background.
