OpenOffice Writer Bails Me Out Of A Word 2000 Crisis
July 26th, 2006
My Read on Michael Crichton’s State Of Fear
May 30th, 2006
This may seem more editorial than review. But I defy you to show me a major newspaper wherein the reviewers do not editorialize. Reviews are a subjective thing and it’s easy to purport an agenda. No matter how subtle, you will be able to discern a bias when it exists. I will do no less and my biases will become apparent as well.
I’ve been reading Crichton for a long time–Andromeda Strain and Terminal Man come to mind as early readings. Being cheap-ass, I wait for the time when discounted paperback versions start to appear on the shelves; invariably I will pick up Crichton’s works as soon as they appear. I have always enjoyed his books and when I start one I generally finish it in a single read.
Having said that, I consider State Of Fear to be his weakest novel though it may be his best work of non-fiction (I’m not sure of that, I vaguely remember Electronic Life as his only non-fiction book that I’ve read). One might ask why he didn’t just make this a non-fiction work in the first place but it seems obvious to me that his novels have a ready-made audience. I’m sure the messages found within this book were seen by many who would not have otherwise noticed. You cannot blame the man for using the format that will reach the largest audience.
When I started reading, knowing Crichton’s scientific proclivities, I fully expected to be scared by another global warming scenario. And he went the opposite way! A real system shock. That is most likely what kept me reading. The story itself seemed implausible at times: the characters constantly hop flights to new locales and perform duties better handled by militia or mercenary types. But the real story lies within the story and within the dialog.
In my limited circles I am known as a tree hugger and in my small way I am a conservationist. I collect newspapers in grocery bags and take them to the recycler. Same thing with aluminum cans. I will not apologize for this. But I distrust mass movements and broadcast information that prey on our fears. And now I have another reason to avoid a common bandwagon: research that goes counter to the grain of popular perception. I’m unlikely to join either side–I look for balance always. I believe in trying to understand radical opposing views and then seeking a middle ground where the truth may or may not lay.
Crichton takes some shots at the PLM (politico-legal-media) machinery—I love it. People are being led by their nose rings and it’s refreshing to see an author cut to the chase. Not that anything will change but recognition is welcome. It continually amazes me that while individualism is proclaimed from every rooftop, in practice it is nearly nonexistent.
One thing that I particularly loathe is the deification that we give celebrity. I equate this most often with the way we are willing to worship actors. And plenty of actors are riding the “green” movement. You see it every day. An actor builds an eco-friendly house and we laud them for being so conscientious. And they hop aboard private jets to cross the country for a talk show on which they will espouse their views and promote their virtue. A Gulfstream jet carrying 12 people from Beverly Hills to San Francisco will burn 450 gallons of aviation fuel “generating more pollution per capita than most people on this planet will generate in a year” (I learned this from the book). And some egotistical actors show up at ecology fundraisers but figure their appearance is their contribution. What they are doing is gaining exposure. Free publicity. Don’t get me started here. I also have a problem with celebrities buying non-working ranch hideaways (do-gooders raising dogs) but that’s a separate discussion.
Tidbits
A few things I learned while reading “State Of Fear“:
- Global warming trends not supported by scientific studies: “Crop failures, spreading deserts, new diseases, species extinction, all the glaciers melting, Kilimanjaro, sea-level rise, extreme weather, tornadoes, hurricanes, El Niño events…”
- “Crop failure — if anything, increased carbon dioxide stimulates plant growth. There is some evidence of this happening.”
- Getting greener: the Sahara Desert has been shrinking since the 1980s which refutes the spreading deserts aspect of global warming
- “As for new diseases–not true. The rate of emergence of new diseases has not changed since 1960.”
- There are 160,000 glaciers in the world; there is mass balance data extending five years for only 79 glaciers in the entire world. Nobody knows that they are all melting.
- Kilimanjaro has been rapidly melting since the 1800’s–long before global warming.
- The sea level has been rising four to eight inches every hundred years since the start of the Holocene. It is not rising faster now.
- Hurricane strikes over the last hundred years are clearly not increasing.
- El Nino occurs roughly every four years–twenty-three times in the last century. It has been occurring for thousands of years and long precedes any claim of global warming.
- Studies show no increase in extreme weather events over the past century. Or in the last fifteen years. And the GCMs (General Circulation Models) don’t predict more extreme weather. If anything, global warming theory predicts less extreme weather.
- Most Americans believe that crime in the country is increasing when it has actually been decreasing for twelve years. The US murder rate is as low as it was in the early 1970’s.
- One hundred fifty years ago there was less old-growth forest than there is today.
- The total weight of termites in the world are a thousand times greater than the combined weight of humans. Termites produce methane which is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
- Banning DDT caused somewhere from thirty to fifty million deaths–more than Hitler. DDT was not a carcinogen and in fact was so safe you could eat it. People did eat it, for two years in one experiment. Parathion (its replacement) is unsafe and killed hundreds of farm workers who didn’t know how to handle it.
- The earth experiences a million and a half earthquakes a year, a Richter five every six hours.
- At any moment there are one thousand five hundred electrical storms across the planet. Eleven lightning bolts strike the ground every second.
- The “common knowledge” that Antarctica is melting is untrue–studies indicate about 2% of the continent is warmer but the continent as a whole is getting colder.
So what did I gain from this read? A different perspective. Do I buy it verbatim? No. Should we quit devoting time spent trying to make our world safer? Probably not. But the world changes constantly and will continue to change regardless of our puny efforts. I’ve often seen it as a race–our technologies cannot stop or go backwards so we must rush forward while trying to avoid extinction. I don’t really believe that we can ever overcome the forces of nature or truly direct the path of an evolving planet. I also know that somewhere, someone is always going to be trying.
More reading (excerpts and limited annotations):
Crichton Fans Will Embrace ‘Fear’
By Carol Memmott, USA TODAY
“State of Fear is sure to rile liberals, conservatives, environmentalists, the media, academics, lawyers, politicians, celebrities and average citizens as Crichton challenges commonly held beliefs about global warming and the environment. Are the self-proclaimed guardians of the planet, he wonders, acting on data-backed principles or reacting to inaccurate information fed to the masses by irresponsible journalists, well-meaning but ignorant tree-huggers and self-serving celebrities, scientists and lawyers?”
“When Crichton allows Fear’s do-gooders to catch their breath, they learn “the truth” about scientific studies and how scientists and environmentalists with opposing agendas can interpret data to suit their needs.”
“What makes the book so compelling is Crichton’s concern that the environmental movement has gotten off track. He blames the “politico-legal-media complex” for turning us into misinformed scaredy-cats who live in “a state of fear” about many aspects of our lives, including the environment.”
“Exploiters of the environment” include environmental and government organizations and big business. He cites their “equally dismal track records,” adding, “Everyone has an agenda. Except me.”
Beware! Tree-Huggers Plot Evil to Save World
“And Mr. Crichton does indeed have a message, as an afterword titled ‘’Author’s Message'’ attests. Among his stated beliefs: ‘’I suspect the people of 2100 will be much richer than we are, consume more energy, have a smaller global population and enjoy more wilderness than we have today. I don’t think we have to worry about them.'’ And: ‘’I blame environmental organizations every bit as much as developers and strip miners'’ for current failures in wilderness management.”
Crichton’s Evil Greens Can’t Scare Us
Review at San Francisco Chronicle
“Where are all the great American left-wing thriller writers? Such conservatives as Crichton, Tom Wolfe, Tom Clancy and the “Left Behind” guys are all minting money, but, aside from le Carre (who’s not an American) and maybe Carl Hiaasen (whose stakes are merely Floridian instead of global), who’s left to quicken pulses for the blue- state crowd?”
What? Who are you? I don’t need left-wing OR right-wing writers. Is that Ok?
Crichton Techno-Thriller Explores Danger Of Mixing Politics, Science
By Allan Walton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Review at Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
“But — and you knew one was coming — Michael Crichton finds himself a red state resident in “State of Fear,” a gripping, if sometimes tedious techno thriller that lumps global warming worrywarts in the derisive and divisive camp of baby seal-loving, tree-hugging, vegetable-munching pantywaists. Simply put, he tells us global warming is much ado about nothing. Damn conspiracy theorists!”
“In a carefully laid out (and footnoted) plot, Crighton takes three years worth of personal study of the scientific reports on the environment and stages an edge-of-the-seat thriller about an environmental group being infiltrated by a neo-con organization. Oops, that’s where I thought the plot was heading. I was wrong and like lawyer Peter Evans in the novel, I had my head completely turned around on the topic of global warming…”
“… the book is full of graphs and footnotes to help back the question on whether global warming is a real enough threat. There are also many actual examples of events that have happened and their outcome and/or affect on other events. Essentially, Crichton is warning against politicized science and the inherit harm and misdirection that can come from this.”
“We worked out the statement we could live with when it comes to global warming and our belief system — some things that Crichton says, we accept but we still believe it is important for the U.S. to sign the Kyoto agreement (as we don’t see the harm in reducing CO2 emissions and we do think we should be a better global partner)”…
(I recommend reading this review in its entirety using the above link)
“Crichton clearly enjoys drawing the line between fact and fiction exceedingly fine. Nicholas Drake’s fellow travelers include George Morton, a billionaire philanthropist who’s pledged $10 million to NERF; Ted Bradley, an actor and environmental activist who plays the United States president on a popular TV drama; and a shadowy band of eco-terrorists known as the Environmental Liberation Front (ELF). The author’s disclaimer notwithstanding, it’s impossible not to identify these folks as stand-ins for the billionaire philanthropist George Soros, the ‘’West Wing'’ star Martin Sheen and the real-life Earth Liberation Front. The nonfictional N.R.D.C. finds itself burdened with an acronym, NERF, symbolizing all that is soft, squishy and childish.”
“Crichton’s proof is itself laughably rigged. Kenner cites study after study but Drake, the scheming NERF leader, is allowed no evidence. ‘’Just trust me, it’s happening,'’ Drake says of global warming. ‘’Count on it.'’ There are, of course, thousands of scientific studies that raise disturbing questions about climate change and the human role in its cause. To claim that it’s a hoax is every novelist’s right. To criticize the assumptions and research gaps in global warming theory is any scientist’s prerogative. Citing real studies to support the idea of a hoax is ludicrous.”
Amazon Customer Reviews (More than 900)
Giving Barry His Due
April 28th, 2006Barry Bonds. Media goes “Wah… Barry won’t talk to reporters again” or “Barry was mean to me” and I’m just worn out by the steroid thing. Enough already. Politicians have already gotten involved to help “save” our national past time. Well drugs are not ruining our sport. Now if you were to say greed and corruption I might buy into it. If you were to blame the masses that demand greatness I would certainly consider it. But drugs? Well there is one thing everyone seems to forget and I almost never hear mentioned. No matter what drugs you are taking to make yourself a better athlete, no matter what you do on your own time: you still have to hit the damn ball. Reflexes, bat speed, eye, coordination.
What does it take to be a major leaguer? Say you have 3000 major league players and the population of the country is 300,000,000. Maybe add a few thousand who could do it but have not gotten the opportunity or opted to travel a different path. I can’t even figure the percentage without scientific notation (which then becomes useless and incomprehensible to me). Let’s say better than 99.999% of the populace. Not even 1 in a million… more like 1 in 299,000,000 make the grade. That’s your basic requirement to be a pro.
That is the way it is with all professional sports. It’s a human lottery. I spent years studying relative stats and there are only a handful of players that so dominated their sport that they stood head and shoulders above everyone else. In a sport that already produced the very best of the entire country these players were far beyond even “the best of the rest”. Babe Ruth, Ted Williams. Barry Bonds. Maybe they are almost worthy of the adulation that they commanded while at their pinnacle of performance.
So you must be better than 99% of the country. You must do this every day for a long time. You must have consistency and perseverance. You must have sufficient dimensions to your game to compensate for deteriorating skills as you grow older. You are competing against younger athletes as you stay in the league longer. Reaching the top and staying there is an arduous, ultimately doomed, task. You must commit to conditioning and taking care of your body like you’ve never done before.
“If Rome falls it won’t because our gladiators let us down by seeking to be the best at their specialties. It will be because of our misplaced worship, the idols we choose to deify.”
If anything, one should feel sympathy for the athletes that consume performance-enhancing drugs. They have made the ultimate sacrifice in their quest for perfection. Because what of the long-term health factors? Do we even know the long-term consequences of the newer miracle drugs? I thought that after watching the quick downward spiral that Lyle Alzado’s life took that we might assume that this obsessive pursuit may not be completely safe. Are the new drugs that much safer? Would I trust them in my own body?
If Rome falls it won’t because our gladiators let us down by seeking to be the best at their specialties. It will be because of our misplaced worship, the idols we choose to deify. Our warriors must seek an edge… because we demand it. Our champions must leave no doubt in anyone’s mind that they are equal to none, superior to all before and since. There is nothing new to any of this. For thousands of years we have had our champions—they were the best horse thieves, the bravest in battle, the most cunning and ruthless. The requirements have been nothing short of invincibility. Well let me give you a little clue. There is no such thing. Man is man and man is beast. Man and beast grow old and suffer and die. Gloriously or infamously. And the achievements on battlefield or playing field become a fading history as the years slide by. Some achievements, by their supposed (imagined or real) magnificence, live longer than others. Some are magnified by their decadence or debauchery. But they are the past and they become asterisks and footnotes. And all together they will never add one dim star to the night sky.
So let’s not make Barry Bonds a god. But it’s ok to give him his due. I can’t tell you how much satisfaction I’ve gotten from watching him. There was a time when a pitcher would try to get a fastball by him and he would, nearly without fail, turn on it and pull it. How many times did I see that? I would say aloud: “You better not try it”. But some cocky young hurler always thinks his fastball is that much better than anyone else’s. And throws it. And it is driven. Pulled even. He doesn’t have to hit it over the centerfield wall. When your bat is quick enough to get around on a mid-90’s heater, you can hit it out with or without steroids.
I read the excerpts from Shadows Of Darkness. Didn’t do much for me. Some find it incredulous that a player passes his prime years (27-29 are the generally accepted numbers) and suddenly takes his career to a new level. The thing that people aren’t talking about is that players frequently gain power as they head into their sunset years; most of the time their averages suffer. Bonds hasn’t suffered from this decline because he sees the ball better than any other player in the game and his knowledge of the strike zone is so superior to others.
It is obvious that Sports Illustrated doesn’t like Barry Bonds. I would imagine that he refused to talk to one of their people at some time or hurt their feelings in some way. While reading the readers’ letters I marveled at the amount of hate. I marveled that SI reprinted some of the drivel about shunning Bonds, walking him every at bat, fans turning their backs on him when he homers. You know what? People didn’t like Ty Cobb either. I don’t like Ty Cobb. You think he would have cared? I would guess that if I were to walk up to Bonds and demand an interview or story that he would make me feel small in some way. Know what? I don’t care. He occupies a different spot in the world and I don’t envy it and I’m not conceding in the smallest way that his is better than mine. Nor do I care if it is. I don’t have to like him. But I must admire his accomplishments.
About Next 9
April 28th, 2006I make these lists nearly every day… for myself. I write down 9 songs that stand out in my listening experience on that particular day. Usually I hear it in the background and I think “there’s one I meed to have”. Songs that I consider “must-haves” for the library. Many of them have made other lists before and it’s time for their inclusion into an elite collection. Why 9? Well that just seemed to be a figure that worked. It removes the pressure of selecting 10 if there are no other legitimate candidates that day.
Next 9 In Line
| Savoy Brown | Tell Mama |
| Neil Young | Needle & The Damage Done |
| Robert Palmer | Sneaking Sally Through The Alley |
| Wings | Let Me Roll It |
| Leon Russell | Crystal Closet Queen (Live) |
| BTO | Blue Collar |
| It’s A Beautiful Day | Don And Dewey (Live) |
| Wishbone Ash | Outward Bound |
| Blodwyn Pig | The Modern Alchemist |
Next 9 In Line
April 19th, 2006| Led Zeppelin | Night Flight |
| Kinks | Artificial Light |
| Dire Straits | In The Galley |
| John Entwhistle | My Size |
| Blue Oyster Cult | O.D.’d On Life (Live) |
| Iggy Pop | Lust For Life |
| New York Dolls | Bad Girl |
| Joe Cocker | Age Of Lily |
| Electric Light Orchestra | Kuiama |
Puzzle Pieces In The Maelstrom
March 12th, 2006At some point you may become curious. “What is this fool doing now? He’s all over the place!” Well keep guessing, wiseguy. Because even I don’t know. I like to move around a lot. If not physically moving I at least have this. The boundaries here are easily transgressed. Not only that but they are constantly shifting. If you choose to see it as a puzzle, an adventure even, you will be ok. If you are looking for logical, marked paths you will be disappointed. The trail is there but it constantly branches and often disappears for a bit.
What happened to Blog “X”?
Yeah, well about that: y’see I just didn’t quite believe in that one. Maybe I’ll go back but I like the ability that WordPress affords me to categorize entries. And that other one? Well I like the features but I haven’t learned how to use them all properly yet. So maybe everything will wind up here. Or maybe I’ll just bounce back and forth as the whim strikes. Not a problem for me, you have a problem with it? Whyn’t you go play in the street kid, ya bother me.