I think that this case study gives evidence against attempting to predict the far future being useful
Isn’t it evidence for a more narrow conclusion? Specifically, that attempting to precisely predict the far future isn’t going to work well? Arrhenius was correct that climate change was going to happen, just wrong about several particulars. Or was he right for so many wrong reasons that it’s not worth noting?
Here by useful I meant “prescribing actions that turn out to have social value.” I agree that Arrhenius had the right general idea, and that this is noteworthy.
Isn’t it evidence for a more narrow conclusion? Specifically, that attempting to precisely predict the far future isn’t going to work well? Arrhenius was correct that climate change was going to happen, just wrong about several particulars. Or was he right for so many wrong reasons that it’s not worth noting?
Here by useful I meant “prescribing actions that turn out to have social value.” I agree that Arrhenius had the right general idea, and that this is noteworthy.