BBC Focus Magazine

[Shadowwolf]

A light hearted look at some of the popular science doom myths.

http://brainz.org/15-ways-science-will-kill-us-all/

I was intrigued by the group think robots but the link appears to be dead and I cannae find anything else out.

[Jamie]

Very good.

The time travel one makes me think though.

"Since Mallett's father died young of a heart attack, Ronald resolved to discover time travel in order to save the life of his departed dad."

Well, obviously that hasn't worked then, because if he did discover time travel then he'd save his Dad and therefore not spend his life trying to invent time travel to save his Dad, hence his Dad would depart this mortal coil and he'd spend his life trying to invent time travel to save his Dad which obviously wouldn't work, because if he did discover time travel then he'd save his Dad and therefore not spend his life trying to invent time travel to save his Dad, hence his Dad would depart this mortal coil and he'd spend his life trying to invent time travel to save his Dad etc. I think.

Unless he spawned some kind of alternate timeline when he went back in time (á la BTTF2) in which case this version of him will never know if he successfully succeeded with his time travel shenanigans in the first place. Mind you, who's to say he hasn't already succeeded.

[Shadowwolf]

Until there be proof he has, then the most plausible explanation is that he has not; such is how I would see it.

[The Jules]

I want me a robomonkey!

[Shadowwolf]

Until it kills you!

[Nike2020]

I hate to say it but sci-fi movies like terminator, 2012 and waterworld, claim to base some of the work on fact, just not as much as other boring films

[Shadowwolf]

Well I can see what current research developments and knowledge were stretched to make the Terminator or Waterworld movies, but 2012 based on fact?

[Flakkarin]

As an earth scientist, I thought 2012 was poo science, but pretty

Fun article, it's amazing how many of the commenters just can't detect the very large tongue-in-cheek aspect... makes you wonder if it's because true intentions are harder to read when only written down, and the tone of voice and body language are missing; or whether there really are that many silly people out there!

[M Paul Lloyd]

I'm inclined to think that its not so much a case of there being a lot of silly people out there (although some certainly are) as a lot of people who take things very much on face value when it comes from seemingly authoritative institutes, especially if, as you mention Flakkarin, the humour indicators are missing. It is generally assumed that science is a serious business and humour doesn't suit it too well, at least to the wider world outside.

[EzBloke]

I'm inclined to think that its not so much a case of there being a lot of silly people out there (although some certainly are) as a lot of people who take things very much on face value when it comes from seemingly authoritative institutes, especially if, as you mention Flakkarin, the humour indicators are missing. It is generally assumed that science is a serious business and humour doesn't suit it too well, at least to the wider world outside.

I'm going to opt for "dense individuals"...
I do like your argument but the humour indicators, for me, are all there.

Ez