When the fictional novel "contains many graphs and footnotes, two appendices, and a 20-page bibliography" citing real-life research into a real-life phenomenon, you're blurring that line.
What do you think Crichton's genuine intent was in including misleading footnotes referencing real scientific studies in a book about a real scientific phenomenon he's on record as denying the severity of?
I confess, as a reformed English major, that I don't care much about authorial intent. If I did, then I'd probably have to destroy the joy that books like Ender's Game bring. To me, it's much more useful and no less true to pretend that books are independent of the author.
If your point is that Crichton is a jerk or a climate change denier, I don't disagree. It jibes with what I've heard. Much beyond that, I'm not sure it's possible for us to interpret his motivations accurately.
