The Socratic Method

Aside from the prose, I liked this book. Michael Crichton was a scientist writing a novel, a situation that could go well or not so well. I think it worked in this book because it causes a big reaction from readers (including me). This book pretty much contradicts most of the things that are common views held about global warming
One of the features of State of Fear that stood out to me was his extensive (almost relentless) use of the Socratic Method. He had a lot of technical information that he really needed to get through to his audience, so he brought in a Socrates - or, as we know him, Kenner. Kenner coolly argues with those supporting the idea of global warming, asking them guided questions and making them contradict themselves. In the process he gets to tell them what the actual facts are, a reality he cites with endless sources (which Crichton himself does often.) Crichton also uses the monologue as a way to present his information, practiced by an emotional character or by Professor Norman Hoffman.
On page 501, in such a monologue, Hoffman introduces the concrete idea behind "state of fear". He says,

"But the military-industrial complex is no longer the primary driver of society. In reality, for the last fifteen years we have been under the control of an entirely new complex, far more powerful and far more pervasive. I call it the politico-legal-media complex. The PLM. And it is dedicated to promoting fear in the population - under the guise of promoting safety."

And, in his Author's note on page 627, he reflects the same concept:

"The current near-hysterical preoccupation with safety is at best a waste of resources and a crimp on the human spirit, and at worst an invitation to totalitarianism. Public education is desperately needed."

He is addressing a hybrid problem whose generator is a hybrid complex. Now I don't know to what extent Michael Crichton believed the details of all the conspiracies in this book, but it is obvious that there is an underlying theme: disinformation. This passage, combined with many, many others throughout the book, shows us not to trust just anything we hear. Always ask the speaker to site their sources. Even then, check the credentials of the source; if they're a researcher, check the sources of their funding. Obviously not everyone has time (or a burning desire) to do these things. We hear, read, and see so much information every day that most of us really don't do much second-glancing.

This, though, is Crichton's point. He is aware of the "information era" and addresses it and its problems in many ways. Most obviously, he speaks through his characters. Using a novel to embody his opinion has the advantage of characters (vs a science journal article). Not only does he put the information out there, but uses characters to control how we relate to that information. At first it is Evans, who we've already established a relationship with. We like him, and he also happens to ultimately accept the data Kenner presents to him. Later on, it is Ann Garner and Ted Bradley who Kenner rips apart. But they don't/won't accept his basic points. We also happen to not like Anna and Ted very much.

Another thing he does is use footnotes to reference scholarly articles - in a novel! This makes sense, though. He is emphasizing his point about information and disinformation and how much of that there is in the world. He is encouraging us to check credentials. He is also trying to validate his argument, which has some ideas which are radically different from those of the common concerned citizen.