Quote:
Originally Posted by Polynikes
jack, it's actually a fictional story within a nonfictional context. He spends most of the time showing trends, graphs, and tendencies of various groups towards hysteria.
You'll find the trends very interesting. I was angry at how mislead most lay people are. (<=  )
I've asked you to consider other viewpoints. I suggest picking this book up. |
So you didn't read the analysis of the scientific arguments presented in Crichton's book? ... You didn't do a WH search to browse the several discussions re: State of Fear? What a surprise.
Yes, I'm well aware of the book's premise and its inclusion of scientific data. But the value of scientific data is degraded when, for instance, one factor like CO2 levels is argued relative to climate while ignoring other known "forcing factors", or local weather is presented as representing global trends, or expert testimony is cherry-picked and presented out of context, or fiction like the "70s ice age scare" is represented as truth, and on and on .... Jeebus, poly, Crichton demonstrated the same confusion as you did re: the very basic difference between "weather" and "climate".
... and you want me to "consider other viewpoints" while ignoring their faulty foundation, and suggest that I invest time by "picking the book up", regardless???
How about focusing on how the spectrum of presented arguments stand up to the scrutiny of well qualified individuals, and go from there ...