BTW, How is your 1954 computer doing?
http://www.realclimate.org/wp-comments-popup.php?p=248&c=1#comment-8427

Best,

D

“Since fear-mongering drives the grant process which, in turn, drives science, is it any wonder that the ideology of science today has grown increasingly pessimistic? ”

Why my ‘ideology’ and ‘wish’ point was made. This is a clue to disregard the points made.

BTW, usu. I say ‘wishy-wish’ to put it in proper context, but I like to modify my tone according to site.

Best,

D

The idea that technological advancement will continue or accelerate is not based on wishes and dreams, but observation.

I must disagree with the comment that “…things were relatively static from about the year dot to ~1750.” Despite much knowledge being lost in the first few 100 years A.D., technology continued to advance in most areas from there. While this was slow by today’s standards, it was advancement none-the-less. Architecture, Astronomy, travel, warfare, agriculture, metallurgy, art, and so on, all made steady technological progress over those ‘dark’ times.

What really started the ball rolling was the creation of the printing press, which allowed for cheap and widespread sharing of information. As information technology continues to accelerate rapidly, it is only logical to expect other technologies to benefit and move forward as well. The idea that technology will stop advancing is contrary to all of the available evidence!

If we look at the arguments closely, we find that it is those with the pessimistic predictions that are 1. generally wrong, 2. not grasping the dynamics of the situation, and 3. have a more ‘faith-based’ perspective than those who are deemed foolishly optimistic.

I do agree with Dano when he says: “When one treads on ideology, people circle the wagons.” But I think that the ideology of today is one of tremendous and irrational pessimism. We live in a world in which people like Paul Ehrlich are praised as great thinkers and visionaries, even though they are constantly wrong, and people like Bjorn Lomborg are crucified for having the audacity to point out some encouraging news straight from the available data!

Since fear-mongering drives the grant process which, in turn, drives science, is it any wonder that the ideology of science today has grown increasingly pessimistic? Take global warming for example: despite all the evidence that a cooler globe ‘restricts’ the biosphere, while a warmer globe produces a more robust ‘Gaia’, we are asked to believe that nothing good will come from future warming. Cost/benefit analyses of AGW don’t even address positive aspects of warming, only the costs of implementing a regulatory system to the ‘benefits’ of no (or less) temperature change. The positive aspects of warming are not even part of the discussion, or are simply dismissed as ‘wishful thinking’ despite all the evidence to the contrary.

While I find Kurzweil’s timeline for future progress a little too fantastic to believe, at least he is basing his predictions on the available evidence, and not the gloomy cosmology that sprang from the disillusionment of the ’60s generation!

Lots of actions are based on those wishes too: “technology will clean up our mess – full steam ahead!”. When one treads on ideology, people circle the wagons.”

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

The key to science is this: One person makes one prediction, another makes a different prediction. Then we wait to see who was right, and who was wrong.

Roger Pielke, Jr. wrote that “change” (presumably including wealth generation) would be greater in the next 70 years than the previous 70. Jim Clarke wrote that he agreed.

You and Eli SEEM to disagree, but you’ve made no commitments.

I’ve done significant analyses on how per-capita GDP can be expected to change over the next 70 years, as compared to the previous 70.

http://markbahner.typepad.com/random_thoughts/economics/index.html

Based on Brad DeLong’s work, the world per capita GDP in 1930 (in 1990 dollars) was $1134, and it increased to $6534 (again, in 1990 dollars) in the year 2000.

That’s a factor of 5.76 growth in 70 years (from 1930 to 2000).

I say the growth factor from 2000 to 2070 will be approximately 50.

In other words, if the world per capita GDP in 2000 (switching to year *2000* dollars) was $7200, it will be approximately $360,000 in 2070.

http://www.longbets.org/194

Specifically, here are my world per-capita GDP estimates for every 10 years from 2000 to 2070 (in year 2000 dollars):

2000 = $7,200
2010 = $9,500
2020 = $13,000
2030 = $19,000
2040 = $31,000
2050 = $62,000
2060 = $130,000
2070 = $360,000

NOTE 1: If the 70 years from 2000 to 2070 created “only” a factor of 5.76 in growth, the world per-capita GDP in 2070 would be “only” $41,500.

NOTE 2: Even if this is the case, Roger and Jim would STILL probably be right…there’s a much bigger “change” going from a per capita GDP of $7,200 to $41,500 than there is going from $1,134 to $6,534. In other words, both $1,134 and $6,534 are still very poor…whereas $41,500 means that the average person in the world would be approximately middle class by U.S. standards.

Dano, why don’t you and Eli make YOUR predictions for world per-capita GDP every 10 years, from 2000 to 2070? Then we’ll see who is right and who is wrong.

Or is that too much science for you two?

Lots of actions are based on those wishes too: “technology will clean up our mess – full steam ahead!”. When one treads on ideology, people circle the wagons.

Best,

D

Check out any book by Ray Kurzweil or his website: http://www.kurzweilai.net/

Mr. Kurzweil is certainly an optimist, as his vision of the future makes most science fiction drab in comparison, however, his analysis of human and technology advancement is difficult to argue with. While he readily admits that a major nuclear war or other such catastrophe would slow the advancement of technology, it will not stop it. If we avoid such a major disruption, the future looks bright indeed.

The key is information! Knowledge is becoming readily available for all who seek it. Suppression of knowledge (and of thought) is becoming more difficult. We have seen an explosion of information in the last 15 years with the creation of the Internet. The next step will be a ‘quality control’ process where all the useless information is rapidly weeded out, and valuable information will rise to the top.

This synthesis of good information will not be the product of governments or corportations, but spring from the demand of individuals. This website, and many others, are part of this process which is still in its infancy, but may reach maturity in less than a decade. That is how fast things happen now. Problems that were tediously solved with slow correspondence and massive chalk boards in the past, will be delt with in a fraction of the time, as the best minds can be instantly linked together. On the other hand, charlatans will be exposed in record time.

That is why the next 70 years will see far more progress than the previous 70 years.