Michael Crichton picks a fight with environmentalists

[Last Conformist]

I forgot about the frog thing. Not even supplying an explanation why they didn't use archosaur DNA is not very hardcore.

Something else I'd liked more explanation of is accidentally introducing sex-change capacity in multiple species. My statistical intuition tells me that's freakily unlikely.

[DinoDoc]

Who the hell cares! It was a good story.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
1. glaciers are melting now, but have been melting for the last 300 years, and the speed of melting has increased in the last 300 years

That directly coorelates to the increase in atmospheric CO2. Since we haven't been measuring glacier melting speed for 300 years, how would we know about that?

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
2. From 1986 to 2000, central Antarctic valleys cooled 0.7 C per decade

Need a cite for it, but... Global Warming does not mean it gets warm everywhere. In fact, it is predicted that hot places will get hotter and some cold places will get colder.

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
3. West antarctic ice is increaseing at 26.8 gigatons/yr, reversing the melting tred of the last 6,000 years

That appears to be in contradiction of reports of large Antarctic ice shelves breaking up at unprecedented speeds.

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
4. temperatures around the world (large cities are adjusted for urban heat island' effect. underadjustment is what is given)
a. Punta Arenas 1888-2004: a decrease of 0.6 C
b. Pasadena 1930-2000: an increase of 3.5 C
c. Berkeley 1930 - 2000: an increase of 0.6 C
d. Death Valley 1933 - 2000: an increase of 0.3 C
e. McGill (NV) 1930-2000: a decrease of 1 C
f. Guthrie, OK 1930-2000: decrease of 0.5 C
g. Boulder 1930-1997: decrease of 0.4 C
h. Truman (MO) 1931-2000: decrease of 2.1 C
i. Greenvile (SC) 1930-2000: decrease of 2.3 C
j. Ann Arbor 1930-2000: decrease of 1C
k. Charleston (SC) 1930-2000: increase of 0.2 C
l. New York City 1930-2000: increase of 0.8 C
m. Syracuse (NY) 1930-2000:decrease of 0.9 C
n. Albany (NY) 1930-2000: decrease of 1 C
o. Oswego (NY) 1930-2000: decrease of 0.7 C
p. West Point (NY) 1931-2000: decrease of 0.5 C
q. West Point (NY) 1900-2000: increase of 0.5 C
r. West Point (NY) 1826-2000: increase of < 0.1C
s. New York City 1822-2000: increase of 5 C
t. Albany (NY) 1820-2000: decrease of 0.5 C

Anything on the average surface temperature?

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
5. CO2 levels
1957: 315 ppm
2002: 372 ppm

In 1958, the concentration of CO2 was about 315 ppmv, and the growth rate was about 0.6 ppmv/yr. This growth rate has generally been increasing since then; it averaged 0.83 ppmv/yr in the 1960s, 1.28 ppmv/yr during the 1970s, amd 1.53 ppmv/yr during the 1980s. In 1994, the concentration of CO2 at Mauna Loa was 358 ppmv. The concentration in the spring of 2001 was about 375 ppmv, the most recent month for the which the data were available. Data from Mauna Loa are close to, but are not precisely the global mean value. The Mauna Loa record is due to Prof. Keeling of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

It appears that the data quoted is relatively accurate. What's the point here?

[Drake Tungsten]

Originally posted by DanS
Ah yes, he did put it back up on his web site.

Aliens Cause Global Warming

http://www.michaelcrichton.com/speec...s_quote04.html

Good article.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Who the hell cares! It was a good story.

Question wasn't whether it was a good story, but whether it was hardcore SF.

[Kuciwalker]

Is Foundation hardcore SF? It never explains TONS of the stuff in there.

[Last Conformist]

I suppose Foundation is "Classical" SF. It's certainly not very "hard" science-wise.

[Kuciwalker]

What's an example of hard SF, then?

[General Ludd]

Asimov writes Science-Fantasy. Similiar to Star Wars, ect...

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Asimov writes Science-Fantasy. Similiar to Star Wars, ect...

Uh, no. Star Wars is action stuff that uses science fiction to make it more exciting. Foundation examines the behavior of people when placed in a certain situation, and is considered science fiction because that situation depends on currently nonexistent technology.

[The Mad Viking]

Got this far, had to wade in...

shawnmcc - hope you are feeling better.

I liked your post until the part I have quoted...

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
Fourth, global warming. It IS happening. Glaciers are melting at unprecedented rates for what is probably human history. This is admittedly a very short time reference geologic history, but it's changes like this than can initiate an extinction event, and create rapid evolution, i.e. punctuated equilibrium.

Sorry, ridiculous claim.

Human "history" is about 7,000 years. We have been keeping reasonable climatic records for just over 1% of that.

People are making sweeping generalizations based on infintesimal amounts of data.

Conclusions? Do we have the worst global warming in RECORDED human history.

Global warming in human history is an oxymoron.

Human history represents .0000001 of the global history.

Is our contribution significant? We don’t know. Are there other problems, possibly more significant caused by modern human population levels, lack of concern for the long-term considerations, etc. (i.e. like desertification)? Possibly. Do we need more data? Yes, yes, and YES.

Agreed. But lack of data is not the problem. The problem is mass hysteria based on fallacies causing harmful decisions to be made with the best of intentions.

Sounds sort of like Iraq, doesn't it?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Uh, no. Star Wars is action stuff that uses science fiction to make it more exciting. Foundation examines the behavior of people when placed in a certain situation, and is considered science fiction because that situation depends on currently nonexistent technology.

There's no technology in his books, just fantasy.

[Thucydides]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking

Agreed. But lack of data is not the problem. The problem is mass hysteria based on fallacies causing harmful decisions to be made with the best of intentions.

Sounds sort of like Iraq, doesn't it?

What harmful decisions have been made? As far as know the responses so far have mainly been to twiddle our thumbs and maybe think how it maybe possible some time in future to reduce carbon emission. As a said earlier, I really don't think it matters what evidence for global warming is found, politicians will refuse to make any harmful decisions because there's no money in them for doing so.

As for global warming, just because we have a small sample size, doesn't neglect the fact that the sample size shows an increase in temperture. Thus, global warming is real.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
What's an example of hard SF, then?

Didn't you read the thread?

I recommend Robert Forward's Dragon's Egg.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
Global warming in human history is an oxymoron.

Human history represents .0000001 of the global history.

Atmospheric CO2 levels has been going up and up, and so has the average surface temperature. That seems to be global warming.