Savage Beatings Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 A speech by Michael Crichton on various crises that we've faced. Compelling. At least to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 OK - let me ask a bsic question: if getting info out of Chernobyl was apparently so difficult, then how does he know he's working with the right number of deaths, unless he himself went into the Ukraine and tracked down everyone living at Chernobyl at the time of the accident. It doesn't fly IMO - reports that DID make it out of (Soviet Era propaganda machine notwithstanding) had many firefighters dying at the scene or being well within the lethal radiation zone as it came under control. No way 'day of' deaths and 'radiation deaths' topped at 56. I'd soomer believe I could buy a bridge in Manhattan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted October 2, 2008 Author Share Posted October 2, 2008 OK - let me ask a bsic question: if getting info out of Chernobyl was apparently so difficult, then how does he know he's working with the right number of deaths, unless he himself went into the Ukraine and tracked down everyone living at Chernobyl at the time of the accident. It doesn't fly IMO - reports that DID make it out of (Soviet Era propaganda machine notwithstanding) had many firefighters dying at the scene or being well within the lethal radiation zone as it came under control. No way 'day of' deaths and 'radiation deaths' topped at 56. I'd soomer believe I could buy a bridge in Manhattan. So do you think he is lying about it, or do you think that he just didn't do enough research on it? And what are your sources for Chernobyl? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted October 2, 2008 Author Share Posted October 2, 2008 I wonder if Crichton understand the consequences of explaining Complexity as he has. It's ironic to think that he lectures and chastises others for such irresponsible behavior, yet approaches the subject -- while scientifically, valid -- in a socially dangerous way. One can easily assume from his speech that the best course of action is doing nothing. It might be, I haven't study the subject enough to say for certain. Consider tho, that the right course is to do "something" and if we did nothing, it would have dire consequences. Just sayin' that his lecture, if heeded, has an affect that I bet he didn't consider before giving a speech on Complexity. I point to Rene Descartes and how innocuous words about animals not having a soul led to all kinds of animal abuse that he didn't intend. Or Machiavelli who is misunderstood by so many use his so-called methods. They didn't intend for their words to have such consequences. Words are too powerful to be tossed about and usually affect the system faster than any other virus. Crichton, who is fairly popular, should consider his words before putting them out into the system. Maybe a speech about Complexity should be integrated with that about meme evolution. Interesting. I didn't come away from that article thinking he was saying do nothing in the face of a crisis. I came away thinking that the quick fix cause and effect approach to a perceived crisis is almost always wrong, so we need to do a much better job of thinking through our responses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted October 2, 2008 Author Share Posted October 2, 2008 I took it to mean that he felt there really wasn't a crisis to begin with on so many issues EDIT: And I suppose that illustrates my point... people will have different intrepretations and I doubt he considered that... another We should probably all just stop talking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 alot of links and information varies , but here are 3 : 2 3 Regardless i believe Crichton down plays Chernobyl way too much Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 So do you think he is lying about it, or do you think that he just didn't do enough research on it? And what are your sources for Chernobyl? I think he's using murky information to build a hypothesis that needs a better core example. Google it - the number of deaths and definitions of death are all over the place. Yet this great statement of his uses the smallest number of deaths. This from an area that's established to have had thousands displaced all smack dab in the middle the Soviet Union's hyper control of the place. He needs a transparent example, not one from behind the iron curtain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millerx Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Funny thing about this is... is that I trust Creighton's due diligence and research MUCH more than I do the politicians...not to mention the vested interest of the funded researchers, mainstream media and pundits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.