gizmodo | Recently, we did an experiment: We took an outdated issue of a respected popular science magazine, Scientific American,
and researched exactly what happened to the highly-touted breakthroughs
of the era that would supposedly change everything. What we discovered
is just how terrible we are at predicting the long arc of scientific discovery.
The daily
churn of science news tends toward optimism. You know what I’m talking
about: New cure! New breakthrough smashing Moore’s law! New
revolutionary technology! I write about science, and I am always
uncomfortable trying to predict how a new piece of research will change
the future.
That’s
because science can be wrong. It can go down dead ends. And even when it
doesn’t, almost everything is more complicated and takes longer than we
initially think. But just how wrong and how long?
We can’t
very well time travel to the future for those answers, but we can look
backward. I recently dig up the 2005 December issue of Scientific American and went entry by entry
through the Scientific American 50, a list of the most important trends
in science that year. I chose 2005 because 10 years seemed recent
enough for continuity between scientific questions then and now but also
long enough ago for actual progress. More importantly, I chose Scientific American
because the magazine
publishes sober assessments of science, often by
scientists themselves. (Read: It can be a little boring, but it’s
generally accurate.) But I also trusted it not to pick obviously
frivolous and clickbaity things.
Number one
on the list was a stem cell breakthrough that turned out to be one of
the biggest cases of scientific fraud ever. (To be fair, it fooled
everyone.) But the list held other unfulfilled promises, too: companies
now defunct, an FBI raid, and many, many technologies simply still on
the verge of finally making it a decade later. By my count, only two of
its 16 medical discoveries of 2005 have resulted in a drug or hospital
procedures so far. The rosy future is not yet here.
Science is
a not a linear march forward, as headlines seem to imply. Science is a
long slow slog, and often a twisty one at that. That’s obvious in
retrospect, when we can see the dead ends and the roadblocks. It’s less
obvious looking ahead, as we’re being bombarded with promising new drugs
and wondermaterial breakthroughs. So let’s take a look together.
0 comments:
Post a Comment