I've read Crighton's book, too. He says in the afterword that the footnotes are actual references, but admits to having done some cherry picking. Also note that the that he makes no such claim regarding the in text references. They could be either partly, or entirely fictional, for all he tells us.

Anybody wanting to quote fictional references is entitled to, of course, but for balance, also read John Barnes' "Mother of Storms." It is equally readable, which is to say, very.

It sometimes hard to separate weather from climate. Also hard to separate science from politically wishful thinking.