Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
Despite my admiration for the man, there's a reason a science fiction writer should not be on a presidential science panel. Bush would've been better served by Bill Nye. In fact, MC must have served to scare the bejeezus out of Bush, to make him so technophobic during his administration.
|
Well, I think we need to keep things in perspective. As with many science fiction writers, Michael Crichton was not just a science fiction writer. He did also have a medical degree (though I have no idea how much medicine he actually practiced). So, he did have a solid training in science.
Further, this is true of many science fiction writers; they are often scientists who have done serious work in their fields of choice. In some cases, they turned to writing SF as a way of exploring some of their scientific hypothesis that were too radical at the time for publication in mainstream science journals.
I think the other key here is that Science Fiction writers often have a better than average grasp of the possibilities of new technological and scientific developments (By no means perfect though).
Quote:
|
"We cain't have cloning... it'll only lead to Dineo-saurs that swim to San Diego and eat people's dogs..."
|
Never happen; Bush doesn't believe the dinosaurs were real.
Quote:
I understand where he was coming from in State of Fear, though (Note: this is based on my impression from reviews, not from actual reading of the book)... the idea of accepting any data, just because the majority accepts it, doesn't always work. (Ask Galileo.) In fact, much of his work danced around the idea/danger of one person/group using another person/group's technology, without fully investigating the possible flaws or missing information therein.
His ideas on technology were, I think, summed up very well in his movie Runaway, in which the main character, Ramsey, tells his partner: "Let me tell you how it is. People make robots. People aren't perfect. So why should we expect robots to be perfect?"
|
Well, there is some truth in that; one just needs to temper what makes a good story from what might exist in the real world. Robots won't be perfect, but they are unlikely to go on killing sprees either.
--
Bill