State of Fear?

[Cybrweez]

Has anyone read Michael Crichton's 'State of Fear'? The main premise is that government needs the masses to fear something in order to control. That's not such a original idea, but his assertion is that since the end of the Cold War, the fear the US has used is global warming.

Another interesting theme is how science works, and that most scientists would say there is global warming, though the data doesn't support those claims.

[Cail]

That's a very old theory....That people define themselves by what they hate/fear. I tend to believe it.

[aTOMiC]

That's a very old theory....That people define themselves by what they hate/fear. I tend to believe it.

A pretty good example would be what happend in Germany in the 1930s.

[Cybrweez]

Right, the idea is not original, but the conspiracy part is that today, global warming is the fear that is used.

[ur-bane]

How much of a true "fear" is global warming?
Sure, it's in the news now and again, but its effects, if any, aren't immediate. So is it a true fear for us?

[Cail]

Did you happen to see "The Day After Tomorrow"?.

There are very compelling arguments both for and against global warming, but there's a certain mania by those who maintain that it's a fact.

[ur-bane]

Was that with Dennis Quaid? The world is engulfed in superstorms?

That's just it, Cail. Why such a mania when it is not a proven fact?
The debates continue in the scientific community, and yet there is still
no concrete evidence either way that would support the fear.

Plus, how many really care if the effect may not be felt in their lifetime?

[Cail]

Yeah, that's the one.

I think a fair amount of people care in a very abstract way, and a very vocal minority really care one way or the other.

It is a simple fact though that we don't do enough to prevent pollution or conserve resources, and if we (the world, not just Americans) were more conscious of those things, I think the hysteria about global warming would fade away.

[ur-bane]

I agree 100%.
For many people, there's a thought here and there about global warming, and maybe they perceive a small threat, but it's not important enough to take an active role in environmental preservation and reducing "greenhouse gas emissions."

I guess the prevailing attitude about environmental conservation should be "What can my little bit accomplish?" instead of "What the h*ll can I do about it?"

[Cybrweez]

I just saw a bit on History channel's Modern Marvels, detailing how Europe w/in 100 years will have an Ice Age b/c global warming will affect the GulfStream. It was all backed up by 'simulations'. And it is quite a mania, tied in w/the Kyoto treaty, G-8. And the enviro groups make big money. They want to feed the mania in order to get more donations.

[Cybrweez]

Speaking of 'environmental preservation', Crichton also wrote about how we have no idea how to preserve the environment, b/c nature is constantly changing we can't really preserve it, we have to manage it. He used the example of Yellowstone, and the mess that's been made of that "Preservation".

[Cail]

Very true. I went to Mt.St.Helens a few years ago. The side that was left alone has rebounded quite nicely, the "preserved" side looked like the dark side of the Moon.

[ur-bane]

To clarify, my use of "preservation" was not my intention....the correct word (as written later in my previous post) is "conservation."

"Waste not want not."

As far as Crichton goes, his book was a work of fiction. Certainly he used evidence to support his story, but what about the counter-evidence that he did not use? He chose what evidence he needed to support the point of view in the book.

I did like the book, however. Right up until the bogus ending.

[Avatar]

Not sure exactly what you're saying here Cyberweez. Are you suggesting that global warming isn't real, and that the "threat" of it is part of a consiparcy to "frighten" people?

I'm afraid that global climate change is a very nasty reality, and one that is going to have untold consequences on many aspects of our lives, especially nature conservation and agriculture.

--A

[ur-bane]

While global climate change is a reality, I personally don't see much data supporting any drastic changes in our lifetimes. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has some pretty detailed information on global warming, including long-term projections.

But much like mutual funds, you can't base your long-term gain/loss based on short term data. Trends change. A 25 year spike of .3 degrees C is nothing in the overall picture when you look at the mean temperatures for the beginning of the century and the end of the century.

It's not as bad as some think INHO. But I am no scientist.

[Avatar]

Well, while I see your point, I'm under the impression that it is more serious than you make out there. I know that my own country has recently held a big meeting about it, for the express purpose of making plans to shift agricultural focus in certain areas.

The estimate (conservatively) that within 10-15 years, the part of our country where maize, wheat, etc. is grown will be unable to support those crops, which is going to translate into definite impact any way that you choose to look at it.

Already "abnormal" weather patterns are affecting crops in many countries, just this year, Europe lost around 40% of certain fruit crops due to unseasonal temperatures.

--Avatar

[ur-bane]

To be honest with you Avatar, I really need to read up some more on this. Most of what I am stating is based on personal observation in my neck of the woods, and a few articles here and there, as well as the NOAA site.

After reading "State of Fear," I started researching some more, but my knowledge base is hardly authoritative on the subject.

But I have always had a tendency to believe that things are made out in the media to be worse than they are.

[Avatar]

Fair enough. I should probably do more checking myself as well.

Another thing that we need to be careful of though, is not making the mistake that has been made by us before: "It's not our problem, because we'll be dead. Let the people who are here a hundred years from now worry about it."

This article is a bit longer term than what I was talking about, but relates:

news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/0 ... nes_2.html

And just a few others:

Ocean Temperature and Climate Change

Changing Climates spread Malaria areas

Climate Change As Great A Stress As Aids

Weather to increase world hunger

--A

[ur-bane]

Thanks for the links! I'll be checking them out later. But for now, duty calls, and I won't be back until Monday.
Have a great weekend, all.

Oh....Av, I am in complete agreement about our "let someone else deal with it" attitude. It would be a mistake to not address this issue.
However, in terms of the "fear factor" it's a relative non-issue for most. Because it doesn't affect them now. Unfortunately, some people need that fear to gain motivation to act. Let's hope enough of us act anyway.

[Avatar]

No worries. Hope they prove interesting to you.

I certainly agree that perhaps fear in these circumstances would be a good thing.

--A