I don't think the scientific method and the science fictional method are really analogous. The thing about them is that neither is really practiced very much, at least not consciously. But the fact that they are methodical does relate them.

For someone to be taken seriously it was valuable to have the appearance of someone who deserved to be taken seriously.

The science fiction method is dissection and reconstruction.

You don't think progress goes in a straight line, do you? Do you recognize that it is an ascending, accelerating, maybe even exponential curve? It takes hell's own time to get started, but when it goes it goes like a bomb.

I'm doing a book, 'Chasing Science,' about the pleasures of science as a spectator sport.

My old English buddy, John Rackham, wrote and told me what made science fiction different from all other kinds of literature - science fiction is written according to the science fiction method.

I was thinking of writing a little foreword saying that history is, after all, based on people's recollections, which change with time.