Seems like a reasonable inference. Futurology, even before there was a name for it, seems to hinge on two important factors; immediate need vs convergence of te

Seems like a reasonable inference. Futurology, even before there was a name for it, seems to hinge on two important factors; immediate need vs convergence of technologies. This results in some admittedly anachronistic ideas, but seems like a pretty rational approach, none the less. That the sea was not only accessible to a degree, but we also had hints of what was down there, would likely put that in the front of thinking minds as a problem solved in the near future, outer space being a bit less attractive of a mystery, since it was not obvious that resources could be gained from trying to go there. I do often wonder what our current predictions of the future will look like five or six generations down the line. I'd like to think that we have a better grasp on problems that need solving or how technology will naturally combine to accomplish more work, but I bet the folks in the late 1800's thought they had a good grasp on that, too.