Global Warming the threat to the entire world, or is it. As eco-terrorists plot devestation across the planet to bring awareness to the masses of our impending doom, a small group finds themselves in the path of destruction to try and stop these terrorists.

I always enjoy Crichton's work and this was no exception but I did feel he was trying almost too hard to bring awareness to certain fields of science that at times became almost too much information and not enough story. But overall a good book that once again like most Crichton books makes you look at a certain topic or area of science in a whole new way. ( )

If you're looking for a good light read, skip this. If you want a diversion into laughably-bad pseudoscience with cardboard-cutouts as cast, go for it. I bought this in an airport bookstore, going into a 6-hour cross-country flight, and the only reason I ended up finishing it was boredom and lack of mobility, ultimately. ( )

Everyone knows about Global Warming. The Green House Effect. Our Carbon Footprint. How do we know about these things? The media. What if the media was giving us incorrect data? What if environmental agencies were tell us things were dangers when they really we the natural rhythms of our planet? That is what Michael Crichton is trying to get us to think about in The State of Fear. While a work of fiction, it is based in real data collected by scientists. It really made me think. It made me question what I have always believed about the environment. By the end of the book, I was left with the realization that I need to question the things I have always "known", the things that I have been told over and over again but never thought to research myself. Never thought that I wasn't getting the "real" story. This lesson is useful in every aspect of life and because of that, changed my life a little. It sis all this while being very entertaining. You can't ask a novel to be any better than that. ( )

It wasn't that bad. I found that it dragged a little. ( )

If the ratings of a book depended on how much they make you re-evaluate your thinking then this one would have got ten. The plot was implausible and the characters seemed to pop-in and out without much explanation but this is well worth reading. Not being either an eco-warrior or the reverse, just re-cycling and energy-saving where I can, this book will certainly make me question things more in the future. It seems everyone has an agenda........ ( )

This is another of Crichton's good ideas that resulted in average execution. (Another example is Prey.) I second AshRyan's review below with regard to characters and plot.

What kept me reading and in the end made the time spent worthwhile was the "science" on climate change that was debated throughout and then the bibliography. If you have too many books to read, forget reading State Of Fear. Simply borrow a copy so that you can review the bibliographpy and perhaps, Appendix I. ( )

A few reviewers have commented positively about Michael Crichton's latest bestseller "State of Fear" not only as a source of information about the science (and junk science) of global warming, but also as a novel. On the latter point, I must disagree emphatically.

The novel does have the skeleton of a decent plot, but it is fleshed out so ineptly that at times it is difficult to discern. I have never read a novel more in need of editing. There are so many loose ends left untied at the end that upon finishing the book you feel as though your copy must be missing several pages of denouement. All of the romantic interests go nowhere--although perhaps for a good reason, since the main protagonist is hardly an inspiring, masculine hero.

In fact, nearly all of the characters are among the least interesting that Crichton has ever created. The few of them who are truly heroic are characterized so thinly that they are not really characters at all, but simply vehicles for Crichton to deliver scientific facts, and on occasion perform Bond-like feats of espionage when Crichton apparently remembers that there is a plot that he must resolve somehow.

Entire chapters (and even characters) could (and should) have been cut without adversely affecting the plot, theme, or characterization of the novel. Some chapters consisted of the protagonist dealing with characters (such as the humanitarian's wife) who had absolutely nothing to do with the plot, and who were entirely absent for the rest of the story.

While the theme of "State of Fear" is far superior to much of Crichton's earlier work, its implementation is vastly inferior. *As a novel,* I enjoyed "Jurassic Park" more than "State of Fear" (though I of course disagree with the ideas presented in the former).

My recommendation: don't make the mistake I did and waste your money purchasing "State of Fear." Instead, just go to the library and photocopy its bibliography. ( )

Michael Crichton wrote some of the greatest thrillers of all time. State of Fear isn't the best, but it does something just a touch more. Amidst the race to understand and prevent a disaster from taking place it forces the reader to think. State of Fear deals with eco-terrorism and attempts to give a different perspective on global warming than one normally hears. It could be filed away as just part of the fiction, but it also asks the reader, as Evans is asked, to look beyond what others have told you and look into it yourself. This novel was never meant to force an opinion or turn things on its head. It was meant to make you think, to have you question, research, decide something for yourself and then to act on what you believe. And in the end, that is really what every good book is meant to do. Reading is a pointless exercise if at the end of it something hasn't made you stop to wonder. to question, or to think. ( )

Michael Crichton tells a good story (hence the stars). He researches well too. However, the politics of the science of global warming are so complex that I regret his entering the foray. If you can find a ton of sources speaking of *facts* that Iraq did have WMD, then you can imagine the kind of (even more actual) facts that can be played on a topic which is truly complex. ( )

A great story but also a well researched book about global warming. The truth about global warming is not what the masses think it is. Curious? Read more ... ( )

If you believe in man-made global warming, read this book. If you don't believe in man-made global warming, you may still enjoy this book.

For those already familiar with the science, the book may seem a bit repetitive, but even still the story that packages the science is excellent. ( )

It is almost as if someone took over the late Michael Crichton's brain. This polemic against global climate change is rife with erroneous information, that actually borders on being decietful and misleading. As someone who has thoroughly studied paleo-climatology at the graduate level, I was appalled by nearly every aspect of this book. It is an amazingly bad artifice that is without question the worst book Michael Crichton ever wrote, and I am a fan of several of his other novels.

This is one book that I wish he had not wrote, or failing that, at least not published. ( )

I have read and loved half a dozen of Michael Crichton's novels, but this one paled in comparison. It feels like he is trying too hard to present "real science" and make a point. I felt like I was being bludgeoned by his message. Such a shame. A gifted author such as Mr. Crichton could have told a cleaner story and still raised doubts about the veracity of the environmental movement and the gullibility of the public at large. ( )

One of his best, because this one really does have something important to say. Crichton's a pop novelist, though a good one, and like any such his books' "messages" almost always follow the easy route of repeating fashionable fears and alarums. Here, for once, he stands up to them, and, with a significant display of both research and independent reasoning that he blends well with his usual suspense, stands against the whipped-up, dogmatic hysteria that currently dominates our cultural media. It takes no small amount of intellectual strength and courage to do so. ( )

An awful, trite and utterly boring book about environmental activists. I was shocked to read such propaganda from Crichton - it's reads like a paid info-mmercial! And this from such a talented and original writer. ( )

State of Fear is Crichton's longest, and probably most heavy-handed work ever. In it, he takes on the idea that global warming is real, or alternatively, that global warming may be real, but isn't man-made. There is, to a certain extent, some confusion as to what Crichton's argument is on this score, although one thing is certain - environmentalist activists are evil.

Now, I agree with Crichton on some points - ELF (the real ELF, not the one presented in the book), is a vile organization. On the other hand, the plot of the book involves fictional ELF members trying to set up disasters (in some implausible ways) to try to make it look like the global warming problem is worse than it is; whereas when real ELF members engage in terrorism they are usually limited to bombing research labs that are working on making GMO products.

The novel is extraordinarily controversial, as it attempts to take on a hot button topic, and comes to an unorthodox conclusion. Many people dispute the science presented in the novel (there are a variety of footnotes in the novel that are asserted to be science, and not science fiction). I think that some of the criticism is clearly justified – Crichton certainly stretches the facts beyond the limit that is justified by the available science. On the other hand, he does have some very salient points concerning the woefully inadequate nature of the available data, and how that makes it impossible to draw any conclusion in concerning the future behavior of a system as complex as the climate.

As a novel, the techno-thriller aspect of the book is somewhat implausible and too convoluted. The characters, being mere stand-ins for various points of view in the environmental debate, are pretty flat and wooden. There is an ample helping of poetic justice, as those deemed evil, or merely foolish, get their comeuppance in the end, and the hero gets the girl, the cool job, and the interesting future. The best part of the book, to me, is the extensive bibliography.

I think the book is worth reading, if for nothing more than to see what the hoopla is all about. No matter where you stand on the global warming issue, the book is certainly thought-provoking. Like all Crichton books, the plot is executed competently (even if the actual plot is clearly secondary to the long diatribes on global warming), and the writing flows well. I give fair warning that the advocacy is pretty heavy-handed, but if you can get past that, it is a reasonably readable book. ( )

Wow. What a disappointment. I used to swear by Michael, but this book drove me crazy. It was so poorly written and predictable. I honestly gave up mid-way through because it was boring me to tears. I learned a while back that if you should always strive to be reading a book that you would be happy to die reading. There are just too many books in this world to waste your time on crap. This book is crap. sorry Michael. I loved your other books, but this one really didn't work for me. ( )

An interesting book with a rather implausible plot.

The thrust of this book it seems is to present the author's studied view that the science behind global warming theory is far from rigorously proven. Chrichton understands that most people accept global warming and want to act on it but are mostly unfamiliar with the background behind the ideas. Thus the main events of this book have a believer following a very educated skeptic around the world discussing the science behind global warming the entire way.

Eco-terrorism make up the plot elements and some fun but rather far-fetched action sequence in between the global warming dialog.

I recommend reading this if you want to get a skeptical view of the global warming debate without having to trudge through scientific articles. While not a thorough way to approach the topic it can still create some interest in this view point. ( )

An opposing view of global warming in this novel. Appendix has a chilling essay on eugenics and what happens when a culture embraces pop science. ( )

This is the OTHER side of the Global Warming debate. ( )

Everyone, regardless of which side of the Global Warming issue you are on, must (with emphasis) at least read Appendix I (Why Politicized Science is Dangerous) in Michael Crichton's book, "State of Fear." ( )

As a work of fiction this is not Crichton's finest work. The characters are somewhat shallow and unrealistic. Not so bad as to be an unenjoyable read, but definately not up to the level of some of his other works.
BUT, as a potentially eye opening work - it stands tall. The contoversy surrounding the position the main characters take on Global Warming is a refreshing one. No matter where you find yourself on this issue one thing is undeniable. It has been so Politicised as to be highly irritating to anyone seeking "just the facts." A major failing in society today is people's unwillingness to do actual research rather than simply accepting statements as fact. A scientist or politician's opinion is not a fact. A computer forcast or model is not a fact.
If this book causes us to find more facts for ourselves then it has done what I believe Michael Crichton desired, And hopefully, whatever conclusions we come to, we will A) Act on them, and B) Attack conclusions not people. The current climate of character assasination of any holding another opinion smacks of childish pettiness and a genuine inability to deal with any opposing thought. If you can - Refute it. If you can not - Research it some more.

Not my favorite of Crichton's... Action-packed in some parts, draggy in other parts. Young lawyer Peter Evans is swept up in a dangerous adventure when his client, the wealthy George Morton, begins to suspect that the environmental organization he funds may be committing illegal acts. This book has come under some criticism for its supposed anti-environmentalist perspective... that didn't bother me, but I felt the book was just too long and not tight enough. I felt it did make some interesting and important points about control of information and the politicization of environmental issues, but as a thriller it fell short. If it had been half the length, it would have been great. ( )

Terrible book. A complete intellectual fraud. Crichton constructs an entire thesis of "eco terrorism", attempts to discredit global warming, then trys to take it all back in the "Author's Message". Terrible writing, terrible plot, terrible thinking, bad enough to make one wonder if Crichton was paid to write this book by parties with an investment in discrediting the environmental movement. A disgrace. ( )

jumped the shark ( )