A wager for the history books gives us a glimpse into our future.

From Marketplace, I'm Novosafo, in for David Brancaccio.

One of the most famous bets in the past half century, at least among economists, wasn't about the Super Bowl or a presidential election.

No, it was about the price of medals.

That is, whether five critical metals would be worth

more or less between 1980 and 1990. Really, this was about how we consume natural resources and

whether we would just gobble up more and more as the human population grew or figure out a better

way.

Researchers are now looking at this question all over again, and Marketplace's senior economics contributor, Chris Farrell, went back to the future, along with my colleague,

David Brancaccio.

What's the full story on this crazy bet?

So it's famed biologist and environmentalist Paul Erlich, and he predicted population growth

would deplete the planet's resources, and the increasing scarcity of resources would drive

commodity prices higher. Now, this econoclastic economist Julian Simon, that he just didn't buy

this forecast. He believed human innovation and ingenuity would overcome commodity shortages.

Prices would fall over time rather than rise.

So, Simon, being an economist, challenged Erlich to put some money on the line.

All right.

Real money. Challenge accepted.

Exactly what were they betting on?

Okay.

So they wagers on the decade-long price of five metals, copper, chrome, nickel, tin, and tungsten.

...