In the last few years there have been many books written that warn of perils that will be faced in the next one hundred years. Typically written in haste, possessing only a small measure of predictive power, and resting on only a paucity of historical data, they serve only as activators for the amygdala, and the resulting anxiety they propagate only confuses rather than instructs. Rapid scientific and technological advances in all areas of knowledge has been popular to criticize, with the criticism being efficacious only to the extent that it keeps hidden the real understanding of the science and technology. Genetic engineering, molecular manufacturing, artificial intelligence, and experimental high energy physics are just some of the areas that have provoked fear into the hearts of many, but this fear is easily alleviated once the science behind them is understood.
This book does not represent one of these, but instead is a kind of hybrid. Its author is clearly attempting to raise concerns about developments or trends that he sees as threatening to the survival of the human species, if not the entire biosphere, but he also interjects some optimism. The author is repetitive, at times comes across as being too elitist, and some of his dialog may be too "New Age" ("nature as Gaia") for the more scientific reader. But the book is worth the time, if only to instill deeper investigations into the areas that the author deems the most threatening.
The author claims in the very first sentence that humans are on an unsustainable course that could be globally catastrophic, setting the tone for the underlying theme of the book, and also representative of some of the hype contained within its covers, with empirical evidence for various claims completely lacking. For example, the author claims, without providing references or any other form of cited evidence that: 1. One hundred million acres of farmland and 24 billion tons of topsoil are lost every year. 2. He predicts that global warming will cause hurricanes a lot more severe then hurricane Katrina (just how much more the author does not quantify). 3. The Earth's population will rise to 8.9 billion. He says that the latest computer models predict this figure, but he does not say which ones. 4. He predicts "intense" forms of computerized intelligence, but nowhere in the book is `intelligence' defined in a manner that can be measured (so as to get an idea of its "intensity"). 5. The author does not seem to have a notion of model risk, for he seems to put a lot of faith in their deployment, scolding politicians for ignoring the pre-Katrina models that predicted trouble for the levees in the face of a Category 3 hurricane. 6. Women who are taught to read tend to have fewer children. 7. Productivity in America rose by more than 3% from 1995 to 2005. No explicit measure of productivity is given, and no evidence is given for his claim that this increased productivity was due to increased automation and computing. 8. Human civilization is causing artificial warming. 9. There is an "evil side" to human nature. What exactly does this mean? 10. Immune systems, the human mind, ecosystems, viral evolution, and subatomic structures are "diabolically complex." What does this mean? 11. Cancer and birth defect rates are rapidly increasing, and human sperm count is "seriously" decreasing. However if this is true it would counter the growth of population, the latter of which the author claims is a serious issue for the twenty-first century. 12. The author worries about population growth, with a whole chapter devoted to the problem of "too many people", but having more people also means there are more brains to devote to solving problems. The author does realize this though, since he writes that young people can show remarkable ingenuity even when they live in the worse of conditions. 13. The author refers to a form of "hot fusion" having been invented, but he does not give any details since he says he promised the inventors he would not do so. This only has the effect of teasing the reader, and should have been left out of the book. 14. He asserts that tens of millions of Americans suffered brain damage from leaded gasoline. 15. He gives no convincing reasons for being against human reproductive cloning, either ethical or technological.
The author also falls into the unfortunate trap of argument by authority, with his inclusion of many quotations from famous people whose statements he seems to accept unquestionably. And his view of the scientific community is somewhat naïve, as for example he states that in order for a scientific paper to be accepted for publication, individuals not connected with the author of the paper must review it. This may sometimes be true but it is by no means a requirement. In fact, for highly specialized fields with only a relatively small number of researchers, those who know each other very well, both professionally and personally, typically perform the review of papers. In many instances a "club" mentality has arisen in the scientific community, and objective criticism from members of the club is diminished. Those outside the club are frequently subjected however to harsh criticism that has low scientific or rational content. But in addition to these difficulties in the scientific community, there have been problems with falsification of data from some scientists (if you want to call them that). The author proposes to make such conduct illegal, but this is a radical move that would encourage even more secrecy and anonymity than is now the case.
The book though has some virtues. For example, the author defends the cultivation of genetically engineered crops from the standpoint of as an alternative to pesticides and from the standpoint of improving the productivity of farmland. He also supports entrepreneurial activity as a means for improving certain areas of the world, even at the level of multinational corporations, but recognizes the caution is necessary in order to not alienate local populations. The author also advocates ending subsidies for the oil and coal industry and automobiles with fuel cells, but he never even mentions telecommuting as an alternative to the time-consuming, energy-wasting drive to work. And telecommuting can actually be done right now, even before the high bandwidth fiber optic network connections of the near future. He also looks forward to the day when home gardeners will use their own personal toolkits for the genetic engineering of flowering houseplants. It is fascinating to contemplate what these new plants will look like, especially if one considers the possibility, or should we say, the inevitability of exotic transgenic houseplants, carrying genes from many different organisms not necessarily members of the plant kingdom.
But the author is correct when he says that better technology is essential, and that this indeed is the best time ever to be alive. Those who are born in this century are the luckiest generation, for no other century can compete with its awesome power and dynamics. The technological genie is out of the bottle. The technological Icarus is flying closer to the Sun, and its wings are not melting. Its developers can be proud of what they have achieved, and will achieve in this century. We should not only keep up the pace of technology development but also increase it, to levels that now would be described as dizzying. For it is technology that is the engine and the true meaning of the twenty-first century, and this engine is in hyperdrive, even now creating its own set of issues and constructing its own ethos. But any problems it creates should be solved with more technology...with more and more and more and more.
And more. |
home
