RationalWiki talk:Predictions

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

2024 Senate

I was wrong about the Senate this year, but look at this godawful map for 2024 and tell me the Dems will keep their majority:

🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄^{Ask about our holiday specials!} 19:48, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

It's a longshot, but victory is not impossible for Democrats. All three of the red state senators are popular in their respective states, while conversely Cruz is unpopular enough to put Texas into play (if Texas's voting patterns continue as they did in the last few cycles, then if Cruz underperforms the Republican presidential nominee by even three points then the race is very much winnable for Democrats). Granted, it needs a lot to go right, Tester and Manchin have yet to announce if they're running for reelection, and they'll probably need weak opponents as well (although Montana has a good chance of running Rosendale again). In the last two presidential elections only Susan Collins won in a state that voted for the opposite party on the presidential level. Arizona will be the real wild card here, as Sinema's defection does throw that race into chaos, but if everything goes right for the Democrats, which I say is maybe a 5% chance, then it is possible for them to expand their majority in 2024. Plutocow (talk) 20:09, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Gaza entry definitions

Northern portion of Gaza: as defined by the evacuation zone.

Voluntarily pull out: i.e. not forced out by military strength especially from other entities than Hamas. If they pull out in anticipation of military strength it's voluntary. Occupation the likes we see in the West Bank wouldn't count as pulling out just based on the fact parts of it are more locally governed. Chillpilled (talk) 09:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

2024 UK election

(Or possibly early 2025)

There will be at least one political upset during the election and at least one 'confusion' afterwards. Anna Livia (talk) 18:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Constitutional crisis

Count Binface/Lord Buckethead/another or several of their ilk gets elected.

The 1313 Statute forbidding Bearing of Armour is invoked and constitutional disagreements arise. Anna Livia (talk) 18:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Scotland-Norway dispute

The Shetlands and Orkneys decide to negotiate their legal return to Norway. Anna Livia (talk) 18:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

China will win the second space race.

I see that a relatively new prediction is: "China will win the second space race." (by 2030)

I really don't know how that victory could be defined. I really think that entry should be removed if it cannot be made more explicit.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 19:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

It's funny, because I was gonna ask the same thing right now, and then I find out someone else posted this exact same thing months ago. Anyway, the US could be said to have "won the Space Race" if we define "Space Race" as "getting human boots on the Moon," but if we define "Space Race" as "getting humans into space," then the Soviets have the US beat. Carthage (talk) 07:23, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Sure but I'm talking about how you would define "winning the second space race".Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 08:23, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

That would depend on the conditions set, which are going to inevitably be arbitrary and tainted by nationalism. An exploration into the discourse about who "won" the first Space Race is enlightening on that front, which is why I brought it up. I don't think "winning the second space race" is a useful area of discussion. Carthage (talk) 08:30, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree. Which is why I suggested that the entry should be clarified or removed.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 10:21, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

The 'second space race' will be 'won' by whoever gets boots on the moon again. A somebody. (talk) 14:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Then that is what the bet should say.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 17:27, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

I presumed that everyone knew that there was a second space race going on between the United States and China and that it would be 'won' by whoever landed actual humans on the moon. A somebody. (talk) 18:00, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, I found it ambigious. First to Mars? First with "space laser"? First to set up a profitable orbital construction facility? First to set up an unmanned station on the moon? First to actually set up a lunar base? You might consider rewording it something like: "China will be the first nation to put a human being back on the moon and return them safely."Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 19:58, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

What would be the point of an unmanned station on the moon? A somebody. (talk) 22:43, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

What is the point of any lunar exploration? But that is not the issue.

The meaning of second space race is somewhat in the eye of the beholder. This paper says "The second space race will be between competing companies seeking to establish low cost access to space for ordinary people. The first space race achieved its geo- political objectives but did not open up low cost access to space but rather restricted access to a select few, highly trained astronauts and cosmonauts." This article maintains: "Space Race 2.0 is about building the framework for the future. Having a permanent human presence on another celestial body brings with it substantial authority.This CNN article focuses on near-space satellite and technological development. "These critical national security missions include global positioning, telecommunications, surveillance, reconnaissance, weather and defensive/offensive space warfare. The nations that win this race will also gain the 21st-century military edge — much like the aviation leaders did in the 20th century — and take advantage of the space economy’s nearly $3 trillion expansion."

So I really do think that you need to define your bet.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 07:06, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I wasn't saying 'what is the point of lunar exploration', I asked simply what is the point of a lunar base with no people inside of it to do science stuff. A somebody. (talk) 15:04, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Nah, you're just being persnickety. The implications are clear, and the only reason it could be misinterpreted is willfully ignoring the history of the term "Space race". It's clear both change'e and Artemis have mainline missions looking at landing people on the moon(again for the US) at around the same time. It's obviously become an interesting question because Artemis keeps slipping timetable and change'e keeps moving up. There's no reason to be so technical in describing it. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 13:32, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I disagree and think it's ambiguous.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, and I'm tellin' you that's kinda dumb. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 14:58, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for actually understanding what I meant by 'second space race.' A somebody. (talk) 15:05, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, the first three google hits which I explicitly quote above had completely different definitions. If the meaning is so clear - why are there so many wildly different definitions?Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 09:08, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

People are cowards and don't want to admit that there is a second space race between the united states and china. A somebody. (talk) 15:53, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

You actually read the articles I linked to and came to that conclusion? They generally talk about competition in space! I could probably find others if I was bothered. In any event your comment acknowledges that many people hold vastly interpretations of the term: "Second Space Race".Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 08:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)