Predictions of the future

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Kizmet, Jul 14, 2016.

Loading...
  1. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

  2. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    They're grim because predicting bad things is easy. Everyone remembers the bad things, they always happen, and you can be way more general in your predictions. When you have to predict good outcomes, people expect specifics. Besides, many predictions are not "predictions", it's just a scare tactic to get some action done today.


    Most predictions are wrong. We're not as smart as we think we is.
     
  3. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    Yeah. I'm still waiting for that George Jetson car that flies.
     
  4. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

  5. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    Yeah! Forget these electric/hybrid thingies. Forget those self-driving death traps. Let's make 'em fly!
     
  6. John Bear

    John Bear Senior Member

    In 1900, many publications got experts to predict changes by the year 2000. A Saturday Evening Post writer chose these. Ten out of 14 is pretty darn good. Maybe we can, um, dig him up and get his thoughts for 2100.
    1. Letters C, X, and Q no longer used
    2. No cars in big cities
    3. Average person walks 10 miles a day.
    4. Mosquitoes, roaches and flies eliminated.
    5. Digital color photographs
    6. Average human height increases a lot
    7. Portable telephones.
    8. Prepared meals bought at stores.
    9. Vegetables grown in hothouses for mass consumption
    10. Television
    11. Tanks
    12. Average size of fruits and vegetables increases a lot
    13. Slower population growth
    14. 150-MPH trains

    (The article was published in the Post's sister publication, Ladies Home Journal, because it was felt to be too intellectual for Post readers.)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 16, 2016
  7. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    I'm waiting for Al Gore's Global Warming Armageddon to start.

    Oh, wait....that was supposed to be this past January.
     
  8. John Bear

    John Bear Senior Member

    Well it's a pretty good start:

    "According to the latest data from NASA, issued over the weekend, January 2016 was the planet's most unusually warm month since we started measuring temperature in 1880. No other month in the preceding 1,633 months has deviated this far from what was once considered “normal.” Data independently produced by Japan’s Meteorological Agency confirmed that last month was the hottest January on record globally. Last month broke the all-time January record by the widest margin of any month on record, a full one-third of a degree ahead of last year’s record pace. That means the planet is already on track for an unprecedented third straight year of record-setting temperatures."

    (Slate/Arizona State U -- January 2016 was Earth's warmest month yet.)
     
  9. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    "Global warming", as it was known until we got buried by record snowfalls for several years, then it became "climate change", is one of the biggest hoaxes ever. Al Gore has made a career out of it, while simultaneously being one of the biggest hypocrites in the world, paying 20X the average electric bill to power his 20-room mansion. His prediction that the North Pole would be ice-free by 2014 didn't quite work out, either.

    The truth is that the average temperature of the planet over the last 130+ years has risen only about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit, and 0.11 degrees Fahrenheit over the last 15 years. Weather is cyclical, I remember as a kid having snow mountains in front of my house (I lived on a cul-de-sac), followed by some very mild winters for a few years, and just a couple of years ago, we had Snowmageddon when we were running out of places to put it.

    The biggest reason you can tell that climate change is BS? The government is actually thinking of prosecuting those who deny it. Whenever an oppressive government wants to ban discussion of an issue, you know you're on to something. So much for the First Amendment, huh?

    US Attorney General: 'We May Prosecute Climate Change Deniers'.
     
  10. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    I believe we've had it for a while. It's called a "helicopter."

    Pick your model. Just don't let Mr. Spacely see you shopping online at work.
     
  11. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    He's a Johnny-come-lately. In 1968 Paul Ehrlich famously predicted we were all supposed to be dead from starvation in the '70s. Being completely wrong about that hasn't chastened his doomsaying in the meantime, of course.
     
  12. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

  13. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Indeed it hasn't, Steve. Some Ehrlich quotes:

    (1) "Actually, the problem in the world is that there is much too many rich people..." - Quoted by the Associated Press, April 6, 1990
    (2) "Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun." - Quoted by R. Emmett Tyrrell in The American Spectator, September 6, 1992
    (3) "We've already had too much economic growth in the United States. Economic growth in rich countries like ours is the disease, not the cure." - Quoted by Dixy Lee Ray in her book Trashing the Planet (1990)
    (4) "The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. Population control is the only answer." - Ehrlich in his book, The Population Bomb (1968), predicting widespread famine that never materialized

    I got 'em all here: Dossier - Dr. Paul Erlich

    J.
    .
     
  14. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Financially, Ehrlich has done surprisingly well out of being wrong, though.

    "Even in the face of all of this, the elite caste has showered Ehrlich with awards and honors.

    In 1990—the same year he lost his bet with Julian Simon—Ehrlich was awarded a million dollar MacArthur “genius” grant and was simultaneously feted across the Atlantic with Sweden’s Crafoord Prize, which was worth just about half a million. In 1993 the Heinz Family Foundation bestowed on him its first Heinz Award. This little trinket came with $100,000 in cash and the most delusional praise possible, claiming that Ehrlich’s “perspective, uncommon among scientists, has made [him and his wife] the target of often harsh criticism—criticism they accept with grace as the price of their forthrightness.” Which is a peculiar way of explaining that Ehrlich was completely wrong and that he responded to all such evidence with ad hominem attacks. Five years later, in 1998, he was awarded the Tyler Prize, which comes with $200,000. The money train kept on rolling."

    Wish I could wring that kind of cash out of being wrong. :smile: It's from here: Paul Ehrlich: Even Worse than the New York Times Says He Is | The Weekly Standard

    J.
     
  15. cofflehack

    cofflehack Member

Share This Page