DaGaffer
Down With That Sorta Thing
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 18,981
- Thread starter
- #61
Oh I know they're right to be concerned, but by naive I just mean I don't think they understand the game:
scientist makes wild prediction = news story = political interest = funding for scientist who made wild prediction. Wild prediction turns out not to be true - scientist already retired or dead (hence the nice "in 30 years time..." proviso you usually see in these predictions), so doesn't care.
Of course if it was just one scientist, then no one would take notice, but you have a nice little scientific industry going on; and even those who express doubts do it in a way that encourages more research, or to put it crudely, funding. Cynic? Moi? Perish the thought.
scientist makes wild prediction = news story = political interest = funding for scientist who made wild prediction. Wild prediction turns out not to be true - scientist already retired or dead (hence the nice "in 30 years time..." proviso you usually see in these predictions), so doesn't care.
Of course if it was just one scientist, then no one would take notice, but you have a nice little scientific industry going on; and even those who express doubts do it in a way that encourages more research, or to put it crudely, funding. Cynic? Moi? Perish the thought.
