Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Michael Crichton, Corpo-Whore: Climate Scientists = Nazi Eugenicists

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-05 08:35 AM
Original message
Michael Crichton, Corpo-Whore: Climate Scientists = Nazi Eugenicists
WHEN NOVELIST MICHAEL CRICHTON took the stage before a lunchtime crowd in Washington, D.C., one Friday in late January, the event might have seemed, at first, like one more unremarkable appearance by a popular author with a book to sell. Indeed, Crichton had just such a book, his new thriller, State of Fear. But the content of the novel, the setting of the talk, and the audience who came to listen transformed the Crichton event into something closer to a hybrid of campaign rally and undergraduate seminar. State of Fear is an anti-environmentalist page-turner in which shady ecoterrorists plot catastrophic weather disruptions to stoke unfounded fears about global climate change. However fantastical the book’s story line, its author was received as an expert by the sharply dressed policy wonks crowding into the plush Wohlstetter Conference Center of the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI). In his introduction, AEI president and former Reagan budget official Christopher DeMuth praised the author for conveying “serious science with a sense of drama to a popular audience.” The title of the lecture was “Science Policy in the 21st Century.” Crichton is an M.D. with a basketball player’s stature (he’s 6 feet 9 inches), and his bearing and his background exude authority. He describes himself as “contrarian by nature,” but his words on this day did not run counter to the sentiment of his AEI listeners. “I spent the last several years exploring environmental issues, particularly global warming,” Crichton told them solemnly. “I’ve been deeply disturbed by what I found, largely because the evidence for so many environmental issues is, from my point of view, shockingy flawed and unsubstantiated.” Crichton then turned to bashing a 1998 study of historic temperature change that has been repeatedly singled out for attack by conservatives.

There is overwhelming scientific consensus that greenhouse gases emitted by human activity are causing global average temperatures to rise. Conservative think tanks are trying to undermine this conclusion with a disinformation campaign employing “reports” designed to look like a counterbalance to peer-reviewed studies, skeptic propaganda masquerading as journalism, and events like the AEI luncheon that Crichton addressed. The think tanks provide both intellectual cover for those who reject what the best science currently tells us, and ammunition for conservative policymakers like Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee, who calls global warming “a hoax.”

This concerted effort reflects the shared convictions of free-market, and thus antiregulatory, conservatives. But there’s another factor at play. In addition to being supported by like-minded individuals and ideologically sympathetic foundations, these groups are funded by ExxonMobil, the world’s largest oil company. Mother Jones has tallied some 40 ExxonMobil-funded organizations that either have sought to undermine mainstream scientific findings on global climate change or have maintained affiliations with a small group of “skeptic” scientists who continue to do so. Beyond think tanks, the count also includes quasi-journalistic outlets like Tech CentralStation.com (a website providing “news, analysis, research, and commentary” that received $95,000 from ExxonMobil in 2003), a FoxNews.com columnist, and even religious and civil rights groups. In total, these organizations received more than $8 million between 2000 and 2003 (the last year for which records are available; all figures below are for that range unless otherwise noted). ExxonMobil chairman and CEO Lee Raymond serves as vice chairman of the board of trustees for the AEI, which received $960,000 in funding from ExxonMobil. The AEI-Brookings Institution Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, which officially hosted Crichton, received another $55,000. When asked about the event, the center’s executive director, Robert Hahn—who’s a fellow with the AEI—defended it, saying, “Climate science is a field in which reasonable experts can disagree.” (By contrast, on the day of the event, the Brookings Institution posted a scathing critique of Crichton’s book.)

During the question-and-answer period following his speech, Crichton drew an analogy between believers in global warming and Nazi eugenicists. “Auschwitz exists because of politicized science,” Crichton asserted, to gasps from some in the crowd. There was no acknowledgment that the AEI event was part of an attempt to do just that: politicize science. The audience at hand was certainly full of partisans. Listening attentively was Myron Ebell, a man recently censured by the British House of Commons for “unfounded and insulting criticism of Sir David King, the Government’s Chief Scientist.” Ebell is the global warming and international policy director of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), which has received a whopping $1,380,000 from ExxonMobil. Sitting in the back of the room was Christopher Horner, the silver-haired counsel to the Cooler Heads Coalition who’s also a CEI senior fellow. Present also was Paul Driessen, a senior fellow with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow ($252,000) and the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise ($40,000 in 2003). Saying he’s “heartened that ExxonMobil and a couple of other groups have stood up and said, ‘this is not science,’” Driessen, who is white, has made it his mission to portray Kyoto-style emissions regulations as an attack on people of color—his recent book is entitled Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death (see “Black Gold?”). Driessen has also written about the role that think tanks can play in helping corporations achieve their objectives. Such outlets “can provide research, present credible independent voices on a host of issues, indirectly influence opinion and political leaders, and promote responsible social and economic agendas,” he advised companies in a 2001 essay published in Capital PR News. “They have extensive networks among scholars, academics, scientists, journalists, community leaders and politicians…. You will be amazed at how much they do with so little.”

EDIT

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/05/some_like_it_hot.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
acmejack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-05 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. I used to enjoy his novels
But I haven't read his latest and have no intention of doing so. I am disappointed in him, you would think a MD would evince a little respect for science. Perhaps he is faith healer...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-05 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
2. Emulating Bill Frist? And, so many denigrate "lawyers for hire..."
Clearly, there's a market for "MDs for hire..." by whatever cause...

Sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kerrytravelers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-05 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
3. "its author was received as an expert "
My bad, I thought he went to medical school. I didn't realize he was an expert in Earth Sciences, too. Perhaps he is also an expert in matters of terrorism. I bet the gop could use another expert there, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-05 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
4. Y'know, they say the theory of evolution might be flawed, too
Yep. That's what they say. I heard it. :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carnie_sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-05 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
5. I am proud to say
that I have never read one word that that corporate whore has written. And I am an avid reader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-05 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
6. The climate will do what it's gonna do, no matter what Crichton says.
To the fossil fuel industry, and to the politicians beholden to that industry, Michael Crichton is the Peter Pan of a demented Finding Neverland.

Whatever it is these guys are "politicizing," it is certainly not science.

I think it's a kind of cult. They believe in the "invisible hand of the market." They believe in "economic miracles." They believe that as the oil runs out, and as the climate changes, their benevolent market gods will intervene on humanity's behalf, and life will go on as usual.

As the economy we built on fossil fuels fails, they will not attribute that to any physical reality, but on a failure of people "to believe." They will hate anyone who spreads this disbelief, most especially scientists.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-19-05 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
7. I just posted this in editorials

With this editorial of my own:

These people are just plain evil. There is no more a legitimate debate about global warming being real or that it is caused by man-made emissions of greenhouse gases than there is about smoking causing heart and lung disease. Yet, like the tobacco industry, industrial polluters are willing to spend vast sums of money to promote a pseudo-science to put this in dispute.

The stakes are higher here than with the tobacco argument. There, we were speaking for the most part about the health of individual smokers and those around them. Here, we are speaking about the health of the entire planet. The vice of industrial polluter is something that puts us all at risk.

And they act as though, after the rest of us drown when coastlines are inundated and incinerate after the ozone layer is depleted, they can just take it with them? Where, may I ask?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC