Overall, my reaction to "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton is a Utopian thumbs up! and a real world sneer. Yes, I did find myself being pulled into Crichton's book so much that I had to stop myself, do some global warming research, and reaffirm my beliefs in opposition to Crichton's superbly masterful text. However, many of the people I know would take up the ideas within a text like Crichton's without trying to found their own opinions through individual research; the problem with such a biased text in my view.
I think what SoF evidences for us is not necessarily that humans are in a perpetual 'state of fear', as he seems to make argument in favor of, but in a necessary 'state of susceptibility'. I feel he reinforces this notion in the last part of his Author's Message with his point, "Everybody has an agenda. Except me." (573). The first time I read that I laughed, thinking Crichton was serious, which is amusingly hypocritical since he just spent the last 572 pages, in my opinion, making a case against global warming. But the second time I read this section, I believed he was reminding readers that everyone has an agenda, and whether the agenda is obvious or not, it is always present, no matter how seemingly conclusive or firmly grounded their side of the story is.
As for me, I have always found it odd that we, as a collective, argue about 'global warming'. I feel the term is not realistic, especially for Americans, to use because, and I know I sound like a bigot, 'it doesn't work for stupid people'. In many ways, I feel like this naming ideology completely backfired, and continues to backfire on the very scientists who hoped to alert others of the potential problematic aspects our excessive pollution could be having on our environment. The emphasis is taken off of the pollution and put on this idea that, fundamentally, we are making the globe warmer. I hear, all the time, "It is so cold today...I hope global warming kicks in soon and warms us up!". Such statements evoke similar feelings as when I hear "AIDS is just a hoax!", usually in reference to information akin to House of Numbers documentary, found here http://www.houseofnumbers.com/site/about-house-of-numbers/trailer, that argues that HIV/AIDS is nothing more than another way for scientists to raise funds.
In my opinion, the core motivation for both people's resistance to ideas such as global warming and the reality of HIV/AIDS is laziness and fear. It is easier to find evidence against a hard issue, as Crichton says "And I do claim that open and frank discussion of the data, and of the issues, is being suppressed," (579), than to take the time and effort to research an issue and learn the facts to such an extent as you are able to found your own opinion on it. It is my opinion that this was true of eugenics, is true of climate change/pollution, and is especially, frighteningly true of HIV/AIDS.
I totally agree with you. Calling it "Global Warming" is very problematic. It implies that if it's cold outside, then it doesn't exist. I know that many are pushing the term "climate change" instead, but it doesn't seem to have the same sticking power.
ReplyDelete