See, I Was Right

I have made predictions and statements on this blog a great number of times.  Both are nothing but idle fancy unless they are at some point confirmed or proved false (or mostly something in between).  I have noticed a few things that suggest I have been right about some things.  Now, I am fully aware that I am greatly predisposed to confirming my statements and predictions.  I want to be smart, and I want people to think I'm smart.  Still here are some things that I have seen that have, at least somewhat, confirmed what I have been saying.

The first I have already mentioned, my prediction that we will be able to download our brains into computers during my lifetime.  In this post I have shown that scientists are well on the way, having constructed a functional portion of a rat's brain on a computer.

In another post I discussed questions that don't need to be asked.  Specifically "why?" questions that aren't "how?" questions, "why?" meaning "what purpose?" but have no prior indication that there is a purpose.  Ironically this was in response to a Sam Harris blog post, and Laurence Krauss, an eminent cosmologist, on the same blog had this to say, "Finally, it is the “how” question that is really most important, as I emphasize in the new book.  Whenever we ask “why?” we generally mean “How?”, because why implies a sense of purpose that we have no reason to believe actually exists.  When we ask “Why are there 8 planets orbiting the Sun?” we really mean “How are there 8 planets?”—namely how did the evolution of the solar system allow the formation and stable evolution of 8 large bodies orbiting the Sun.  And thus, as I also emphasize, we may never be able to discern if there is actually some underlying universal purpose to the universe, although there is absolutely no scientific evidence of such purpose at this point,"

In Creeping Miracle I talked about the increasing wealth, health, and freedom in the world, in contrast to the pessimism that abounds.  Over the last five years world life expectancy hasn't changed much (still going up and fastest for the poorest), GDP per capita is UP (yes UP) from 2005 by 5%.  At the worst of the worldwide recession GDP per person was still higher than 2005.  If you are pessimistic about the world please go here and move the bar at the bottom through time.  Finally, although I didn't know it at the time, the Arab Spring was just beginning, toppling dictatorships throughout the Arab world.  Even during this time of terrible crisis the world has been getting better, wealthier, healthier, and more free.

In December of 2008 I complained about some medical problems that hadn't been fixed yet.  One of them was why can't they inject cartilage into joints?  Sure enough, last year University of Pennsylvania scientists announced that they have discovered a way for people to grow cartilage in their joints using their own cells.  This is good because I'm starting to feel my knees.  Laboratory to procedure usually takes about ten years, I believe.

In September of 2008, in a post entitled Doom and Gloom, How Bad Could it Get?  I commented upon the economic situation in the USA as the financial "collapse" started.  In that post I discussed the worst possible scenario (a depression the size of the Great Depression) and what that would actually mean (only being as rich as in 1990).  My last words were to "Buck up people, show a little gumption."  I described the problem not as a question of wealth but as a problem of distribution of wealth and of social services.  Here we are just over three years later and the US GDP is back to where it was.  The US economy did not collapse, neither did the economy of any other country (although it was much worse in Greece, Italy and Spain).  The worst consequences for the US have been high unemployment (still under 10%) which is now dropping as is usual after recessions, and a high government debt.  What is the political problem of the moment?  Income distribution.

I still have to see whether Obama is a "near perfect President."  I would say the results are probably "No, but pretty good considering the circumstances."  Another Bill Clinton, essentially.  When he gets reelected I expect a similar result for his second term as was produced by Clinton.

What does all of this mean?  It means that a fair amount of the time I get things more right than most people, at least in the big picture.  Will this make people take what I say here more seriously?  I seriously doubt it.