I agree with this point, somewhat.

In geophysics we have the advantages of extrapolating the distant past
and of extrapolating the conditions on other planets. Both cases serve
the same purposes as "prediction" for the purposes of validating
scientific principles; we can check whether the evidence conforms with
our mathematics.

We also have the advantage of drawing upon the rigorous principles of physics.

It is in economics that this sort of argument really has some bite.
There is little past and no alternative history to draw upon. Could
this mean we need some other way of thinking about the distant future
than is conventionally provided by economics?

I'd be interested to know what the longest time scale is that
economists can generally agree on a prediction, compared to the time
constants of the system.

mt

On 12/17/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can anyone make a sensible argument to support the idea that money is
> an objective measure of human values, even on long time scales, or is
> it a matter of appeal to authority and revealed faith?
>
>
> "science" models pass or fail based on their ability to predict the
> future. The problem with the long term future is only that it is quite
> safe to lie (or exaggerate) about it because you will probably be dead
> when someone finds out :)
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated 
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of 
global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the 
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not 
gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to [email protected]

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to