Scare tactics
Which is better? To have a doomsayer proved wrong, or be caught unprepared by difficult or catastrophic problems?
Are negiative theories of the future always to be disbelieved? Are they always just scare tactics?
If a doomsdayer is proved wrong, was he never right, or did he affect change? I have heard it said that Paul Ehrlich’s book “The Population Bomb” highlighted issues and helped to start movments that were a part of the reason his predictions were incorrect.
If someone predicted that the levies in New Orleans would not hold against a major hurricane (like they did not with Katrina in 2005) and they were subsequently fixed, and then they held, would that person be criticized as overreacting?
Unfortunately, the world is too complex to say one action causes one other action. There are too many interactions that play a part.
But on the opposite side, how can we also discredit someone just because their theory did not pan out?
In the end, would you rather make changes and have a doomsayer proved wrong or proved right?