Last weekend they had Jurassic Park (#1) on Sci-Fi, and I caught parts of it. Saw it in the theaters when it came out, but seeing it this time underscored for me that–no matter how exciting a dino-thrillride the movie is–the set-up act is filled with implausibilities.
(Like when the heroes see their first dinosaur. I don’t care if it’s a vegetarian brachiosaur–IT’S UNIMAGINABLY HUGE AND NOT AT ALL LETHARGIC AND I’M NOT GETTING OUT OF THE JEEP AND RUNNING UP TO THE THING. In fact, I’ll be demanding that the Jeep be turned around and raced away at top speed, following which I would have a serious discussion with Mr. Billionnaire Dino-Cloner about fatalities and lawsuits and mortal sin connected with driving Jeeps with passengers in the vicinity of free-range brachiosaurs.)
Still, it’s just a movie, and the book is probably better in such regards.
Jurassic Park is only one of Crichton’s novels that have looked at cutting-edge science issues. Another is his just-released book, State of Fear, which deals with global warming.
No, it’s not going to be a re-tread of The Day After Tomorrow (shudder).
Instead, Crichton suggests that global warming has little or nothing to do with humans but is being exploited by activists and scientists to push their agendas.
Scientists, predictably, have launched a pre-emptive strike on the book.
Ok. A few things here: 1) Jurassic Park is an excellent book (way, way better than Lost World); 2) Jurassic Park is an excellent movie (really, underrated as a story-told); 3) C’mon Jimmy, haven’t you ever been soooo struck by the “wondering-of-knowing” that you forgot where you were, what the circumstances or risks MIGHT be, and just fell head over heels for the truth (derivative though it might be). I’m with Dr. Grant, I’m out of that jeep, sputtering, “It’s, it’s, it’s a dinosaur.” Put the original Concordantia on a table, and even if you surround it with lions and tigers and bears (oh my!) I’ll be right there stammering: It’s, it’s, it’s Gratian!
Michael Crichton has been on an anti-global warming kick for awhile. In January 2003, he gave the Caltech Michelin Lecture in which he lays out many of the objections to the golobal warming theory.
http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote04.html
Sorry for answering my own post.
From the linked article – A statement from the Union of Concerned Scientists:
“We hope Michael Crichton fans enjoy his new science-fiction thriller, while keeping in mind there is a very strong consensus among the vast majority of climate scientists that global warming is under way and human activity is a primary cause.”
Now contrast that to this paragraph from the lecture referenced above:
“I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.”
If you don’t have the facts, claim a consensus.
Incidentally, Brian, guess what speech by Michael Crichton is going to start having excerpts serialized begining tomorrow?
That’s the reason that this week (and part of next) are Michael Crichton week. He has so much good to say in the speech I thought it was worth giving the speech more than one blog entry of coverage.
Jimmy,
Sorry about raining on your parade, I mean, blog. 🙂
The NYT has chimed in. Courtesy of The Corner:
Archive
E-mail Comments
Send to a Friend
Print Version
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
HARVARD’S INSTITUTE OF POLITICS [Ramesh Ponnuru]
I’m on a panel there tonight at 6 p.m. with Ken Mehlman, Mary Beth Cahill, and Glen Johnson of the Boston Globe. I gather it will be on CSPAN.
Posted at 12:27 PM
RE: VIRGINIA [KJL]
But you’re not from Chelsea Manhattan like yours truly. That’s big. But I’ll stick with the likes of Byron–you can’t beat Bama.
Posted at 12:25 PM
RE PEDRO [Shannen Coffin]
Rich, spoken like a true loser. Next thing you know, you’ll be switching party affiliations.
Posted at 12:21 PM
ANOTHER SNOWY TIMEWASTER [KJL]
Here. I found annoying. Art class was stressful in grade school.
Posted at 12:18 PM
PEDRO PERFECTION [Rich Lowry]
The Pedro deal is bad for the Red Sox in the short term and bad for the Mets in the long term. In other words, perfect…
Posted at 12:14 PM
MY RED STATE STATUS [Rich Lowry]
Kathryn, I’m afraid I’m only very technically from a red state. Northern Virginia is not real Virginia. I think you have to be Fredericksburg or south for that. I But I appreciate the thought!
Posted at 12:14 PM
WHERE’S THE ARAB STREET? [Rich Lowry]
That incitement story below got me to thinking: what the heck ever happened to the Arab street? It was supposed to blow up with the second Iraq war. Of course, that is what was said of the the first Iraq war too, but this was supposed to be worse, because so few Arab governments were publically on board. But nothing from the Arab street. We’ve been occupying Iraq and have even been forced to bomb mosques in Iraq–and still nothing from the Arab street. In fact, if you measure from recent events in Gaza and the West Bank, the climate in the Arab world has improved over what it was prior to the Iraq war. So will the prognosticators of an inflamed Arab street ever stop making their dire, cliched predictions? Doubt it…
Posted at 12:11 PM
DC BASEBALL [Jonah Goldberg ]
I don’t know if many folks outside Washington care much, but it looks like our local governmemt scored another homerun by nearly-maybe-possibly scuttling baseball coming here. You can read this article or just look at the accompanying picture, which says it all.
Posted at 12:06 PM
PILE ON CRICHTON [Tim Graham]
Surprise, surprise, the New York Times hates Michael Crichton’s new novel against the global-warming lobby. “The novel itself reads like a shrill, preposterous right-wing answer to this year’s shrill, preposterous but campily entertaining global warming disaster movie ‘The Day After Tomorrow.'”
http://www.nationalreview.com/thecorner/04_12_15_corner-archive.asp#048200
Oops, should have looked at the preview. I only highlighted the Crichton entry for cut and paste.
It’s a pity that one of my favorite Michael Crichton novels — Congo — is itself full of phony science (apes employing sign language in a meaningful way).
If Ice has covered Greenland from time immemorial why did Erik the Red name it Greenland?
Also why was it colonised from the 10th to the 15th centuries, by ‘Vikings’ who raised cattle and sheep there?
The current global warming is entirely natural and not caused or indeeed exacerbated by man. What about the pollution caused by volcanoes from the beginning of time?
Frank Payton, England.
Hi Frank,
I’m in England too and I just thought i’d say,well..’hi’, since I have nothing else to add..except that I wouldn’t have even gone to the Island in the first place. I’m way too ‘chicken’ for that.
God Bless.