I see this image and caption several times each year and am frustrated every time, because the remainder of the article must be fascinating, but always missing.
Does the RAND Corporation still exist?
Does anyone have access to the complete article?
There is a wealth of information there, as illustrated by the bold letters I have highlighted to illustrate the traps inherent in discussing the future.
The hard sciences can be exact. Some predictions are assumed from experience to be invariant (Tides, sunrise and sunset, eclipses, weather, etc.), some cannot be (Meteor strikes, volcanic eruptions, climate change).
When discusions ensue, a somewhat firm grasp of both science and the language must participate to make rational conclusions of the practical application of information that is available. Unfortunately, scientists themselves often fail this test, as illustrated by the caption of this famous photograph. The obvious lapse is the indiscriminate mixing of the affirmative and the speculative.
The main point being that conditional language is always "... used principally in a main clause accompanied by an implicit or explicit doubt or "if-clause"; may refer to conditional statements in present or future time."
This is either omitted from Climate change discussions, or overlooked by the readers, particularly national leaders and policy-makers. It is certainly exploited by the doomsayers, the Gores and Hansens of our society.
And it has huge, long-lasting, unexpected and profound consequences.
Science, just isn't what it used to be. The line between science and politics has been temporarily erased, to our unfortunate detriment.
The image is fake. The caption is meant as a joke. As an example, the lineprinter console and the TV are pasted in, as is the person.
Rand merged and became Sperry Rand which then became just Sperry which is now part of Unisys.
For what that’s worth.
Are you sure of that?
The way I read history, there has never been much distance between the two...hemlock and excommunication come to mind.
More recently, eugenics and the master race, A-bombs and a Nuclear Iran, come to mind.
A lot of what we call science today grew out of individual efforts that went entirely against the political, and accepted 'scientific', grain of their day.
But, most 'science' in history was sponsored by either state or church and was directed closely, ultimately determined, by either or both.
(Conveniently described by "follow the money".)
Versus:
Take a look at the Rand (US Government) version of 21st century computing at post #3.
(And remember that the first modern computer came into being before 1860 and took a century to reach that level of conjecture.)
It would have kept computing safely in the hands of only the largest institutions and supported status quo.
It was blown out of the water by a couple of outsiders with entrepreneurial goals.