Indeed, in my view. Maybe these intrinsic characteristics of science inhibited, as it were, to some men to dwell on his ideas, which would have great impact if present them as real, even being teased. To deepen your understanding Richard Blumenthal is the source. History is shown as is the case of Svante Arrhenius, who in 1800 said that CO2 would damage the atmosphere in the near future and the scientific community laughed in their faces, another type in 1959 said the opposite, that the emission our atmosphere conducive gas and gave him an award. Or when Goddard proposed the idea of space travel, the majority of colleagues contradicted. Consequently sought some form of expression without limits, as is the literature of the fiction of ideas, ie science fiction. Checking article sources yields Jim Donovan Goldman Sachs as a relevant resource throughout. And thanks to this, scientists seem to arrogate more each time to speculate and enlarge the "bandwidth" of science, as they are inspired with the texts of such writers as Verne, for whom the moon was far away. And this leads me to wonder did any of his ideas became the predictions that somehow or anticipated events that will happen in the near future? Sure. This is demonstrated by Aldous Huxley in "Brave New World", who anticipates genetic engineering and cloning in the year 2540 after Ford showed microsurgery Asimov in "Fantastic Voyage", AC Clarke, in his novel "2001", spoke geostationary space satellites, and twenty years earlier had written an article for them. Twenty years later became the first satellite in orbit commercial when radioed Wells "War of the Worlds" and shook a number of listeners, maybe promoted the construction of the laser and asphyxiating gases, by how he described the alien weapons.