Har du tittat på tempgraferna ifråga?
Jag vet inte exakt vilken graf du menar, men
den här är den som gäller.
Crichton är en konservativ thrillerförfattare, inte en vetenskapsman, och han tar sig stora friheter med materialet:
"Several scientists whose research had been referenced in the novel stated that Crichton had distorted it in the novel. Peter Doran, leading author of the Nature paper,[20] wrote in the New York Times stating that
"... our results have been misused as “evidence” against global warming by Michael Crichton in his novel “State of Fear”[15]
Myles Allen, Head of the Climate Dynamics Group, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, wrote in Nature in 2005:
"Michael Crichton’s latest blockbuster, State of Fear, is also on the theme of global warming and is likely to mislead the unwary. . . Although this is a work of fiction, Crichton’s use of footnotes and appendices is clearly intended to give an impression of scientific authority."[1]
The American Geophysical Union, consisting of over 50,000 members from over 135 countries, states in their newspaper Eos in 2006:
"We have seen from encounters with the public how the political use of State of Fear has changed public perception of scientists, especially researchers in global warming, toward suspicion and hostility."[21]
James E. Hansen, head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies wrote: He (Michael Crichton) doesn’t seem to have the foggiest notion about the science that he writes about.[4] Jeffrey Masters, Chief meteorologist for Weather Underground, writes: "Crichton presents an error-filled and distorted version of the Global Warming science, favoring views of the handful of contrarians that attack the consensus science of the IPCC."[2]
The Union of Concerned Scientists devote a section of their website to what they describe as misconceptions readers may take away from the book."
Från:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear
