30 ’90s Predictions About The Future We Can Laugh At Since None Of Them Were Correct

We've all heard the phrase "history repeats itself". Often uttered by middle school teachers trying to convince their students of the value of their education, this saying does bear some truth. There are clear similarities between Napoleon and Hitler's attempted invasions of Russia, greatly hyped ships sinking such as the Titanic and the Vasa, and The Great Depression compared to 2008's Great Recession. Even much smaller cultural aspects, such as fashion and beauty trends, recycle over time. It makes sense for people to use their understanding of history to make predictions about the future.

However, no matter how well informed our predictions are, they are still merely guesses. Remember the group of people warning that the world was supposed to end in 2012? Thankfully, they were misinformed. But why do we feel the need to make proclamations rather than simply living in the moment and waiting to see what will come? As naturally curious creatures, people are often searching for some semblance of control. "We have a strong psychological aversion to uncertainty," author Dan Gardner told us in our interview with him. "We really hate being unsure! That aversion is so strong that even being told that something bad definitely will happen can feel better than being told that something bad may possibly happen," he explained. If believing we know something about the future can provide a bit of comfort, the temptation to lean into this hope is understandable. Many people love to read their horoscopes and have tarot readings for the same reason.

When we asked Gardner for his expert opinion on what makes us so susceptible to believing false predictions, he told us to first "be careful about what is and isn't possible about prediction". "We can forecast on smaller scales and shorter time frames," he explained. "But we cannot forecast the really big stuff, over the longer time frames, that we most want to forecast!" A tip he gave to remember this is to "think of weather forecasts". "They're actually quite reliable looking a day or two or three ahead. But looking weeks ahead, they're useless. How far ahead we can forecast varies greatly by subject matter but the bottom line is this: Our ability to foresee the future is quite limited -- and it is only a tiny fraction of our desire to foresee the future!"

He went on to say that there is a clear root cause for people falling prey to predictions that they absolutely should not believe, predictions like "here's what the global economy will look like in 2050!". It goes back to psychology.

"When we are confronted with some major, frightening changes-- like when a crazy man takes office or a pandemic breaks out or a war erupts -- we look into the future and we see that there's a huge number of paths the course of history may take. There's so much uncertainty! That is profoundly unsettling so we go looking for something that will sweep away the uncertainty and replace it with the feeling of knowing." Gardner went on to explain the various coping mechanisms people are likely to take when overwhelmed with the unknown. The first example he notes is finding "a particularly dogmatic form of religion". "Another thing that can replace uncertainty is a conspiracy theory that claims to explain everything. And there's good evidence that interest in dogmatic religion and conspiracy theories goes up during heightened uncertainty."

Lastly, he told us, "A third thing that can sweep away uncertainty is experts who make predictions." But not just any expert will do, he elaborated. "The sort of expert who says 'maybe' or 'it's possible' a lot will not sweep away uncertainty." Only an extremely confident expert will put minds at ease. "They KNOW what's coming! And they have a simple, clear, conclusive story to explain it. That sort of expert gives us the certainty we psychologically crave." This confidence can be comforting initially, but Gardner is sure to note the facts. "Unfortunately, research also shows that the predictions of that sort of expert are especially likely to be wrong."