Wacki, you seem to be at a loss to understand why many of the extremely technical folks on this forum are taking pot shots at you. I'll try to explain.
You said:
>>I get this argument a lot. People say we shouldn't listen to scientists about all
>>sorts of things because they couldn't get Y2k right. Heck even Michael
>>Crichton made this argument in a Senate committee hearing. After reading
>>parts of Michael Crichtons book "Travels" it's obvious that he is a complete
>>loon that believes in the paranormal, spoon bending, etc. And despite his
>>medical degree, he amazingly doesn't seem to understand evolution or even
>>read peer-review journals on mosquito resistance to DDT. So it's easy to
>>dismiss him but it's hard to dismiss the Y2k argument. So, what went wrong?
First. Please directly quote Michael Crichton. Michael Crichton is a fiction writer with a medical degree. He is an absolute EXPERT at researching his particular fiction subject and picking references from perfectly acceptable scientific journals to prove bits and pieces of what he is writing. As everyone knows, a lie that contains a bit of truth is far more convincing.
As such he was the PERFECT person to give commentary on what has been going on in the scientific community.
The man is obviously quite intelligent. Calling him a loon does nothing to prove your point. Point of fact, his fiction writing shows a dedication bordering on insanity when it comes to researching his topic. Take a look at the number of articles, journals, and other publicatinos he quoted in "Prey". Calling a very intelligent man a loon simply hurts your credibility.
As someone pointed out, a person with an MD is not some all-knowing person. Why would someone who specializes in heart medicine even read journals concerning evolution and DDT? Calling them idiots or loons would be equally as foolhardy.
A number of people here have told you EXACTLY what happened during Y2k. We are not going to provide dozens of links for you to write your term paper. Find them yourself.
#1 Programmers point out that there was a potential glitch in software. It was not a revelation, and was not unexpected. It was intentional.
#2 Companies whose components were mission critical to their success began updating their systems.
#3 Lawyers and liability forced other companies to update as well
#4 The media hyped it beyond all belief. Not once did they say "here are the companies that have or have not updated, etc". They simply kept focussing on what would happen if major systems like air traffic control completely collapsed, or banking disinegrated. Oddly enough these were the companies who updated first....
If you want to know what went "wrong" then look at any sensationalistic over-hyped thing the media reports out on. They get stories wrong 50-75% of the time. Look at the OJ trial, Jon Benet recently, y2K less recently... look at their reporting around the time of the election the last time around, when one major network declared a presidential winner and was WRONG.
You continue to put your foot in your mouth with every new post. Please stop.
Finally, you say "wasn't it true that nothing went wrong in areas where nobody fixed the bug". No, it isn't true. Anywhere that bug existed, date stamps would be incorrect. This isn't magical. Important systems were fixed prior to y2k. Those that weren't fixed obviously weren't very important.
The Media picks their experts the same way political parties do. And the media experts are the ones you end up listening to. Just as biased and wrong as all the other "paid" experts.
.
Facebook
Twitter