Hey Peter. You mention FUTURE SHOCK, referring I think to the book. I missed it first time around, so I thought I'd catch up on it now. I'm having a really hard time getting through it. While I am interested in the thesis, my 50 years of hindsight prove that he is just wrong about so much. As a prediction guy, he got it all wrong. I'm hoping the second half of the book elaborates on the thesis more and doesn't waste my time with more litanies of predictions that turned out to be totally wrong. In other words, tell me about the implications of future shock, not the supposed causes.