Originally Posted by Vaultboy

I've always been perplexed by how Americans put Environmental Scientists and Environmentalists in the same boat. They are two distinct groups of people. Crichton is probably aware of this, but he makes these blanket statements to generate controversy for the benefit of sales.



That's why I'm even more dissapointed in him. Charles Pellegrino is also a SF writer, who is also a scientist (in fact, there are many). Read Pellegrino's novel DUST - Its perhaps the best Ecological thriller ever written, and while Pellegrino embellishes for effect, he avoids blatatly misinforming the reading public. Crichton is well aware that lay people read his books and take what he says as gospel (pun intended). He is a knowledgeable person, who is respected for researching the premise of his novels. If Crichton had written State of Fear without adding in all the references I would have been more forgiving, but in using peer-review references his book becomes a structured ARGUMENT. And he used his reputation to mislead. I have many friends who I had to argue with after they read that book - because they accepted that Crichton is telling the truth. That's also why scientists are tearing into it.

Crichton knew this would happen. He knew the controversy would enhance publicity of his book (or at least whoever gave him the idea to do it knew). At best he was irresponsible. At worst, he's shown himself to be an anti-environmentalist fanatic.