What I’m thinking is hes looking for more like perdictions that didnt come true ala "wed all be living with flying cars " Or on the moon colony by 2015 ,
Try science fiction for something like this ,
Patricinus Scriblerus: Punoqllads is quite correct ( of course, he has based his calculations on Engywood’s statement that such an asteroid has a 1 in 200,000 chance of hitting the earth). The chance of such an asteroid missing the earth is then 199,999/200,000 and the chance of N asteroids all missing is (199,999/200,000)[sup]N[/sup].
If N=200,000 the chance of all the asteroids missing is 0.3679 to 4 dp, so there is roughly a 63% chance that at least one will hit the earth.
For a 95% chance of a collision we need a 5% chance that all the asteroids will miss i.e. we need to solve
(199,999/200,000)[sup]N[/sup] < 0.05, whence
N > ln 0.05/ln 0.999995 = 599,144.96
599,145 asteroids will do it, but 600,000 seems a sensible rounding off.
Economics? But this was a question about science.
It almost seems that Science has become the new religion. It can’t be questioned or laughed at. It is always fun to review the past errors. What I’m wondering is, how many of todays excepted theories will be disproven 100 years from now?
Probably most of them if not all, Khadaji. That’s the difference between science and religion. Science is not invested in the answer to anything. It’s a process of continuous exploration with the expectation that nearly any component of our current knowledge is subject to eventual obsolescence.
Of course science can be questioned. That’s what scientists do every day. But the questions, in order to be valid, must be based on reason, not on belief.
What are you doing when you are supposedly “laughing at” past errors? Think about it. What happens when an atheist, for example, tries to laugh at religious beliefs, which can to a large extent be considered “past errors” of science.
>> how many of todays excepted theories will be disproven 100 years from now
Today’s excepted theories have all been disproven already so you don’t need to wait. OTOH, today’s generally accepted theories no doubt will continue to be refined and expanded but I am not expecting any time soon for scientist to say they have finally come to the conslusion that the Sun does indeed revolve about the Earth.
Food would come in pill form or be synthetic eg soylent green
Pavements would have conveyor belts on them
People would have silver hair and wear clothes made out of foil
Clothes would be made of paper and disposable
We’d all have domestic robots (that would moan a lot and be generally sarky)
Robot pets
futuristc sports eg rollerball, death race 2000
Atomic energy would be so cheap there’d be no need to meter it
The sea would be mined for gold and other elements
We’d live on the moon and have hotels in orbit
We’d live under the sea
People would live forever so we’d have to bump them off (Running man, logan’s run)
Cold fusion
Hot fusion
Supersonic travel is the way forward.
The end of history
Spurs would win the league.
Only one of these is impossible.
OK, I was wondering why you chose the date 1907, so I went to the link–but I still can’t figure that out. As near as I can tell, the only “19” on that webpage is in the copyright date, 1996.
Look, if the OP just wanted some funny anecdotes for a standard “wacky, zany” radio Zoo Crew, maybe I was overreacting. Someone else already advised him to read “The Experts Speak,” and that’s a solid source of hilariously wrong-headed predictions by all sorts of well-known people.
But even if everything the OP ends up saying on the radio is meant as harmless fun, there IS a genuine danger involved. The OP doesn’t see that danger. To him, I probably seem like an old scold with no sense of humor. But I happen to think it’s a very bad idea to spread the idea that “Scientists are such bozos- look at the stupid things they used to believe! Hey look at what THIS Nimrod predicted would happen- what a maroon!”
And, no question, there are all sorts of silly things that serious scientists once believed. You want some “zany” examples?
-
Aristotle believed that whales were fish and that many animal species were simply born spontaneously, without parents.
-
Ptolemy believed that Earth was the center of the universe.
-
Galen believed that only veins carried blood, but that arteries carried air.
-
Lamarck believed that animals passed acquired traits on to their offspring.
All these beliefs were utterly wrong. They may even seem foolish, today. But should we be laughing at those men? Were they idiots? No!
Tom Clancy likes to say that all of the most catastrophic decisions of history were made by brilliant men, because stupid men don’t get trusted with the kinds of important decisions that could lead to disaster. His observation holds true for science, as well. Almost all obsolete, discredited scientific theories were proposed by brilliant men- after all, stupid men don’t spend years studying a serious subject, and then coming up with a scientific model to explain it. Ptolemy was sorely mistaken about the nature of our solar system, but he was no fool. He made observations, and came up with a plausible working model of the universe. Over time, it turned out his model didn’t work, so it was replaced by other models that worked better. That’s the way science operates.
It’s fine to note that scientists are human, that they’re fallible, that they don’t always know all the answers, that they have their own prejudices and biases like everyone else. I have no problem ridiculing stupidity or dishonesty in ANYONE, whether it’s a scientist, a priest, or a politician. But I’m uncomfortable with a comedian going on TV or the radio and spreading the notion that science is a joke, especially when most of the people in the audience don’t know anything about the subject.
Sad to say, nowadays, most people learn more about the world from pop culture than from any other source. That’s true in politics, and it’s increasingly true in science. Jay Leno and David Letterman are, for many people, the main source of political news. And that’s scary!
Again, I understand that the OP just wants a few laughs… but he should think about the implications. Imagine the repercussions of people going around saying
“Who cares that doctors say I should quit smoking- what do doctors know? Doctors used to think leeches cured disease.”
“Ah, so what if astronomers say the Earth is warming- those are the same dweebs who said the comet Kohoutek would be spectacular.”
“Oh, so now scientists say I should stop eating fatty foods? What do they know- I remember when scientists built that Hubble telescope that didn’t work. What a fiasco.”
I don’t mean to put too much pressure on a DJ, or to take his efforts TOO seriously, but he has to understand something: apart from a small, elite, educated group, most AMericans only know about science what they pick up in high school or in the mass media. And that means people in the media ought to think long and hard before spreading the notion that scientists are dweebs who get everything wrong, and should be ignored.
Look, if the OP just wanted some funny anecdotes for a standard “wacky, zany” radio Zoo Crew, maybe I was overreacting. Someone else already advised him to read “The Experts Speak,” and that’s a solid source of hilariously wrong-headed predictions by all sorts of well-known people.
But even if everything the OP ends up saying on the radio is meant as harmless fun, there IS a genuine danger involved. The OP doesn’t see that danger. To him, I probably seem like an old scold with no sense of humor. But I happen to think it’s a very bad idea to spread the idea that “Scientists are such bozos- look at the stupid things they used to believe! Hey look at what THIS Nimrod predicted would happen- what a maroon!”
And, no question, there are all sorts of silly things that serious scientists once believed. You want some “zany” examples?
-
Aristotle believed that whales were fish and that many animal species were simply born spontaneously, without parents.
-
Ptolemy believed that Earth was the center of the universe.
-
Galen believed that only veins carried blood, but that arteries carried air.
-
Lamarck believed that animals passed acquired traits on to their offspring.
All these beliefs were utterly wrong. They may even seem foolish, today. But should we be laughing at those men? Were they idiots? No!
Tom Clancy likes to say that all of the most catastrophic decisions of history were made by brilliant men, because stupid men don’t get trusted with the kinds of important decisions that could lead to disaster. His observation holds true for science, as well. Almost all obsolete, discredited scientific theories were proposed by brilliant men- after all, stupid men don’t spend years studying a serious subject, and then coming up with a scientific model to explain it. Ptolemy was sorely mistaken about the nature of our solar system, but he was no fool. He made observations, and came up with a plausible working model of the universe. Over time, it turned out his model didn’t work, so it was replaced by other models that worked better. That’s the way science operates.
It’s fine to note that scientists are human, that they’re fallible, that they don’t always know all the answers, that they have their own prejudices and biases like everyone else. I have no problem ridiculing stupidity or dishonesty in ANYONE, whether it’s a scientist, a priest, or a politician. But I’m uncomfortable with a comedian going on TV or the radio and spreading the notion that science is a joke, especially when most of the people in the audience don’t know anything about the subject.
Sad to say, nowadays, most people learn more about the world from pop culture than from any other source. That’s true in politics, and it’s increasingly true in science. Jay Leno and David Letterman are, for many people, the main source of political news. And that’s scary!
Again, I understand that the OP just wants a few laughs… but he should think about the implications. Imagine the repercussions of people going around saying
“Who cares that doctors say I should quit smoking- what do doctors know? Doctors used to think leeches cured disease.”
“Ah, so what if astronomers say the Earth is warming- those are the same dweebs who said the comet Kohoutek would be spectacular.”
“Oh, so now scientists say I should stop eating fatty foods? What do they know- I remember when scientists built that Hubble telescope that didn’t work. What a fiasco.”
I don’t mean to put too much pressure on a DJ, or to take his efforts TOO seriously, but he has to understand something: apart from a small, elite, educated group, most AMericans only know about science what they pick up in high school or in the mass media. And that means people in the media ought to think long and hard before spreading the notion that scientists are dweebs who get everything wrong, and should be ignored.
I believe the Michaelson-Morley experiment to detect ether wind was performed in 1887.
The astonishing negative result prompted the ad hoc hypothesis of Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction, which Einstein adopted for SR, but for something completely different.
What? You quoted Tom Clancy? There goes your respectability 
The problem with that is the ancient Greeks had a heliocentric system that worked as well as Ptolemy’s geocentric system. However, the heliocentric system didn’t exactly mesh well with Christian doctrines. It took a great deal of effect just to beat back Church influences.
As many people jump on the band wagon as not. Witness the prolific “I laugh at your mythical Sky pixie” sigs and of course the Invisible Pink Unicorn. I have no problem with these either BTW. If there is a god, he doesn’t need me to defend him.
I just can’t imagine why people are upset because a man wanted some fun anecdotes about past beliefs.
Okay, have some fun with erroneous beliefs, with past predictions, with speculation that was disproved.
But, please, don’t position it as “science gone wrong.”
The general population is ignorant enough as it is in general and with respect to science. We do not need to aggravate this situation by reinforcing silly stereotypes. I cringe when I see scientific reports in the press because they are often very poorly done by a reporter who understands nothing and the report is full of errors and catchy soundbites. We do not need more of that when the general public is so woefully ignorant.
I am reminded of an old Charlie Brown strip. The teacher is explaining how, in old times, people were so ignorant they thought the world was flat! Imagine that! Charlie Brown breaks out in histerical laughter: “They thought the world was flat! Ha ha ha!” After the laughteer subsides a bit he asks the teacher: “So, what do we think nowadays?”
The general population is ignorant enough as it is in general and with respect to science. We do not need to aggravate this situation by reinforcing silly stereotypes. I cringe when I see scientific reports in the press because they are often very poorly done by a reporter who understands nothing and the report is full of errors and catchy soundbites. We do not need more of that when the general public is so woefully ignorant.
I am reminded of an old Charlie Brown strip. The teacher is explaining how, in old times, people were so ignorant they thought the world was flat! Imagine that! Charlie Brown breaks out in histerical laughter: “They thought the world was flat! Ha ha ha!” After the laughteer subsides a bit he asks the teacher: “So, what do we think nowadays?”
I’ve already rambled on a lot in this thread, so I promise not to make any more posts on this topic.
It’s worth asking- did the OP really “read” that an asteroid was about to hit Earth? If so, where? In a scientific journal? I doubt it. I think it’s more likely he saw an item like that in the Radio Weenie (is that still around?) or some similar publication or heard some such story on another radio station’s “news.”
It’s the nature of the radio business that DJs are required to do a certain amount of “serious” news each hour. But since serious news isn’t usually very entertaining, DJs generally pepper the real news with amusing anecdotes or silly factoids that they pick up from one wire service or another. Very often, the stories these services provide begin with, “According to a new study from Such and Such University…”
Sometimes these stories are false. Sometimes they’re urban legends that have floated around for years. Sometimes, they’re grossly exaggerated or ridiculously oversimplified.
I say this because MOST serious scientists and medical researchers, even those with healthy egos, are very careful not to make bold, sweeping pronouncements and predictions. But when they issue carefully worded written reports, journalists of all stripes (who rarely understand what the scientists are writing about) often whittle the reports down to a few lines, until we’re left with a punchy, catchy, inaccurate headline.
I don’t think any serious astronomer has ever gone on TV and announced, “An asteroid is going to hit us at 11:53 AM on August 19, 2025. We’re all gonna die!” MANY astronomers, on the other hand, have issued papers suggesting that various comets or asteroids are likely to pass close to the Earth at some point. But such dry, carefully worded papers are “boring,” so news copywriters and radio personalities boil them down to “AN ASTEROID IS ABOUT TO HIT US!” And when a medical researcher like Judah Folkman publishes a paper saying he’s made some discoveries that may yield new, innovative cancer treatments, the story on the radio won’t have much subtlety or nuance- what we’ll probably read is “CURE FOR CANCER FOUND!”
Well, a few years later, when the asteroid DOESN’T hit Earth, and there’s STILL no easy cure for cancer, will people remember how copywriters and DJs fouled up the stories, and ridicule THEM? No! They’ll remember how those boneheaded astronomers made false predictions of doom, and that quack doctor made phony promises about curing cancer.
This was the first thing I thought of. At the time, my family lived in Iowa, along the Mississippi. My parents thought it was a bunch of baloney, and bought earthquake insurance as a lark (it was dirt-cheap, as we were living in an area not known for large, damaging quakes). IIRC, in school, they told us what to do “just in case.”
Yeah, that would make a good radio bit.
To the OP - this column about flatworms ‘learning’ by eating other flatworms was posted just about a week ago.
I’m standing behind sailor and astorian saying, “Yeah! And, yeah! What he said! And, yeah, ditto!”
Anybody who could honestly believe in a statement like this doesn’t understand how science works at all.