Dec
03
2009
Charlie Rose – An hour with Michael Crichton
By admin
A wide-ranging hour-long conversation with author Michael Crichton. His latest book is “Next”. … global warming genetics
Change in Climate
Global Climate|Climate Effects
Join US!
Improve the web with Nofollow Reciprocity.
genius.
but is the other guy drunk? anyone?
He was right.
Science has fallen in with politics before. In the late 19th century there was a “consensus” that some races of people were more evolved and some less evolved. Total bunk but some people grabbed onto it to justify their policies. Of course, like the current warming thing, media, government and science personalities used to to pump each other up and get money. It took a long time for science to shed that sick pseudoscience and get back to real studies of genetics.
charlie went a bit crazy here, crazy by his standards i mean, but still a bit crazy.
the world lost a great intellect and entertainer
pronounciation question : why is his name pronounced “cryton”. i don’t get it! i would have said “criCHton”. are there any other words that have a “ch” pronounced like a “y”? thanks
Like their theme song. Jazzy.
That’s Dr. Chrichton to you man.
I’m surprised that he was not aware of this before he showed up at the senate. I guess his cable guy never hooked him up with c-span.
consensus plays a role in validating data and reproducing experiments and results. However, consensus has no substantive role in actual scientific discoveries or scientific thinking. As Chrichton points out, “consensus science” is the encroachment of politics into science .
R.I.P Mr. Crichton. You are such an inspiration for writers and thinkers alike!
His analogy between a scientist making a causal claim about greenhouse gasses and temperature and a psychic’s mumbo-jumbo is SO flawed. Why would a smart guy make such a bad analogy?
ScienceNews
“These same methane clathrates are present today in the Arctic permafrost as well as below sea level, and remain dormant until triggered by warming.
“This is a major concern because it’s possible that only a little warming can unleash this trapped methane. Unzippering the methane reservoir could warm the Earth TENS OF DEGREES, and the mechanism could be geologically very rapid.”
Search : Large Methane Release Could Cause Abrupt Climate Change As Happened 635 Million Years Ago
“All it takes is one person to prove me wrong. Consensus science is not science.” 47:23
Going before Congress “was like a Stalinist show trial”. There’s the US Senate for you.
Are those “disease owners” and the pharmaceutical companies working together or even the same?
This can be a scary thought if any of them chose a nefarious path to profit.
“Every person that devotes their entire lives to this issue say that he is totally wrong on the science”
Such as?
” Every person that devotes their entire lives to this issue say that he is totally wrong on the science.”
That’s not true.
you have to look at the larger picture MC was painting when he talks bout global warming bs. one of his points is that there is incentive for scientists to say it is real. dont you get it man? the ‘research’ is bs. do u honestly believe that they can predict the weather in 100 yrs? think about all the amount of funding that these institutions are trying to get w/regards to global warming. the larger point is that it is impossible to prove gw is not real which allows for all the bs
michael chrichton is my hero. whenever i see idiots walking around or people trying to act like they are special i think bout MC and know that they arent shit and that they dont need to be taken seriously. this man deserves immense amount of respect
This man seems far more intelligent about the environment………and I like how he pointed out that Al is not a scientist and doesn’t look at the data….most people do not know how to look at the data. I also love his comment about “people love to line up for the catastrophe”. Its soooo true!
MC was a brilliant writer, but it’s sad that his gw position will be a large part of his legacy. He refuses to admit he is in the tiny minority among scientists. The poll he sites is deceptive; MOST scientists wouldn’t claim ‘certainty’. He sounds like a creationist.
With all due respect, Crichton is clearly very intelligent and an well-educated physician, but he is nowhere near an expert on climate change AT ALL. Every person that devotes their entire lives to this issue say that he is totally wrong on the science. Looking at data without background knowledge out of context and drawing a conclusion without being knowledgeable in the field leads to poor conclusions.
RIP Michael king of thriller.
It almost feels as if Charlie is squaring off with MC in a debate over global warming. Why does it seem to me that he his trying to make MC thoughts seem so wrong and outlandish, despite Clayton’s logical reasonings? Why does the majority want a consensus in one favor (catastrophe) and not a thorough look at the real evidence, free from ‘expert witnesses’ or politically influenced reports? Too many questions to be looked at and not enough answers. I smell foul play. hidden agendas?
As an example, in 2009 TED posted a presentation by Barry Schuler of Synthetic Genomics where he mentioned:
“when Craig Venter went and sequenced the microbes in the ocean, in the first three months tripled the known species on the planet by discovering all-new microbes in the first 20 feet of water. We now understand that those microbes have more impact on our climate and regulating CO2 and oxygen than plants do, which we always thought oxygenate the atmosphere.”
watch?v=_xJXZBCOWMY