You said: „The scientific facts he presents in his novel are NOT A WORK OF FICTION“

How did you come to this conclusion? So scientific facts from other scientists are a work of fiction?

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see that the poles are shrinking.

Next time you will say that maybe there isn't any ozone layer and the ozone hole is just a work of fiction

This conversation is getting nowhere. Let's agree to disagree.

They are not FICTION because Crichton ALWAYS has references at the end of each book. Sources he used. That's why I wrote that the facts included in his books are NOT FICTIONAL. The plots, the characters, etc., that's all fiction. The facts are not.

But I think you misunderstand. I'm not saying that Crichton's facts are any more correct than your facts. I was just saying that Crichton didn't make it up. The scientists who came up with the theories that Crichton used may have made it up. I can't judge that. I can just see that all of those things are just theories.

The population on Earth in 1960 was about 2,9 bil., in 2050 it is expected to be 9 bil. people, the level of living in countries like China and India is sharply increasing, we are producing more and more, industry is expanding, consumption of each individual is growing. It is an easy mathematic formula. Maybe it is partly natural process, but our activity has to have a significant impact on environment and the climate we live in.

I'm really surprised how some people react. This is just discussion, not fight. There is no winner or looser. I think there is not „one“ truth. What’s more, we would never know who was right anyway. The fact is that every action has reaction. I know people don't like feel of guilty. And they like to do something what (they believe) can save world. Every catastrophic movie shows how people win. But the real world is usually different than movie. People may lose. Anyway I believe the Earth will survive as several times in the past…
PS: If I were Earth, I would change the climate and create new illnesses in order to get rid of men. 

Men… and not women? How unfair.

to Marek: You're right. Some women too …
OK. Sould I say …mans?
Realy?? This looks so strange 

why not ‚people‘?

Did you see Avatar ? The mankind was looking for another planet to live in after destroying the Earth. The attempts to gain control over local inhabitants and resources fortunately did not bring any success to Earthmen and the planet was saved in the end.

Of course it was a sci-fi but I feel there was a piece of the truth in that story and some scenes and dialogs were truly emotive.

Let's turn away from serious topics … Have you seen the movie ? Did you like it ? 

Unfortunately, or fortunately for the other planet, we don't have another planet to move on.

Once the man kind is gone the earth will quickly recover. After a few thousand years there will be no sign of human existence whatsoever.

To Marek: I have already used „people“ several times so I want to use something different. But…

To jaja7958: Unfortunately not yet. Hopefuly I see it soon. I love si-fi. Mainly if the idea is good.

In my book, watching avatar is kinda a must. One could say the story is sorta dull, then again it is stirred with great sauce, everything is so balanced. The result taste just awesome.
A large TV and LCD is an advantage. So is HD quality.

Some basic information some of you maybe dont know :
http://hnutiduha.cz/…ry-vs-fakta/

No matter what we do or say, climate change can't be influenced by people in any way. It's either true or not and what will happen next depends on Mother nature, not people. People may make it worse. However, there's still one question – what if there weren't any people, would it be happening? There's a theory saying that this what is happening now, which most of us call ‚global warming‘, can be the beginning of another Ice age. Planet earth is believed by scientists to be at the end of an interglacial period after which is supposed to come Ice age. And it's also known that ice age is antedated by a period of time when temperature is higher than usual. Maybe it's just something that people can't explain properly because at the time when it reputedly happened for the last time, people couldn't write so that other generations would be familiar with this. Therefore people came up with a ‚made-up‘ explanation, which is not bound to be true, called ‚global warming‘. It doesn't matter whether it's true or not. People have to be aware of the fact that something is happening and should be ready to deal with any coming situation that could put our lives in danger…
This is my view on this ‚issue‘. I tried to do my best to explain it properly and at least a bit ‚comprehensibly‘ (I'm not sure if it's ok to use this word like this). I guess there will be far more mistakes than usual because I had never dealt with such text. And I'd be glad if you warned me of mistakes you'll find.
I'd like to read the mentioned book by Crichton sometime. However, my english doesn't appear to be good enough so that I could read it without any major problems.

What a long comment!

If you don't mind me asking, what makes you think that the climate can't be influenced by people?

Do you honestly believe that burning billions of tons of fossil fuels won't have any negative ramifications in the future.

We simply have to make the transition from fossil energy to renewable energy. And the national which first makes this transition will be the next leader of the world.

And a lot of people will get incredibly rich… and a lot of people will go bankrupt. All in all, it's about money and politics and POWER (you said it yourself). Not about the climate.

As for the climate… one volcano eruption can do more damage to the environment and the climate than all the cars in history!!!!