Doug Bailey wrote:
> Nanotech skeptics are an interesting lot.
> Generally, most of the loudest skeptics are
> scientists. Yet, their "nano-skepticism" is very
> unscientific. [...] For that matter, no one, to
> my knowledge, has offered a significant
> theoretical objection to MNT. I know there are
> some significant issues concerning energy and
> heat but these are engineering problems. The
> case Drexler lays out for MNT in "Nanosystems"
> has yet to be attacked effectively. Yet nano-
> skeptics persist.
I think one of the problems is the wild
speculation that Drexler and other advocates make.
For instance, the chapters in Unbounding the
Future and Engines of Creation which talk about
reviving dead species and repairing the Earth.
While this may well be possible, it's premature to
make claims without looking at the economics
involved. Also, as can be seen with the
Nanomedicine FAQ, claims that abundant health will
create peace. Seeing such naive and utopian claims
(especially if they're the first contact you have
with the technology) can colour your attitude
about its feasibility.
BM