Are there any other plausible explanations for the cult of the apocalypse?
The end of the world is, after all, probably the single most repeated incorrect prediction of all time. The world has repeatedly stubbornly refused to end for thousands of years now—and yet for many the clock always seems to stand at five-minutes-to-midnight.
Since these are scientists you might think that they would realise someday that the clock is wrong—but no—it’s been about five minutes to midnight for over 50 years! Amazing! Just think how lucky that makes us! Or maybe not—maybe this has something to do with marketing their bulletin.
Er, I wasn’t citing the existence of the world as evidence, rather pointing to the extended period of time which it has persisted for—which is relevant evidence.
I was wondering why p(doom) has apparently been so consistently overestimated. Perhaps another possible reason is attention-seeking. When Martin Rees mentioned a probability of 0.5 on p.8 of “Our Final Century”, people paid attention. Politicians are in on the act as well—check out Al Gore. Doom sells. Perhaps scaring people shitless is simply good marketing.
Well, that went down well.
This is not a new phenomenon:
http://bringontheendtimes.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/end-nigh.jpg
Are there any other plausible explanations for the cult of the apocalypse?
The end of the world is, after all, probably the single most repeated incorrect prediction of all time. The world has repeatedly stubbornly refused to end for thousands of years now—and yet for many the clock always seems to stand at five-minutes-to-midnight.
Or thereabouts anyway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_Clock
Since these are scientists you might think that they would realise someday that the clock is wrong—but no—it’s been about five minutes to midnight for over 50 years! Amazing! Just think how lucky that makes us! Or maybe not—maybe this has something to do with marketing their bulletin.
The fact that we find ourselves in a world which has not ended is not evidence.
Er, I wasn’t citing the existence of the world as evidence, rather pointing to the extended period of time which it has persisted for—which is relevant evidence.
The difference between then and now is that today, there are actually plausible ways it could happen.
I was wondering why p(doom) has apparently been so consistently overestimated. Perhaps another possible reason is attention-seeking. When Martin Rees mentioned a probability of 0.5 on p.8 of “Our Final Century”, people paid attention. Politicians are in on the act as well—check out Al Gore. Doom sells. Perhaps scaring people shitless is simply good marketing.