spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
So, weapons cause war?
Science = War
- Thread starter Atom
- Start date
Those who wish to trade in weapons create a market for them.
All this opinion displayed here is terribly fascinating (read with sarcasm) but has anyone managed to pull out some figures that show that more innovations and inventions come about during war time?
The only hard figures I have ever seen showed that less inventions are being made each year relative to the population indicating we are reaching a plateau at some point in the future. There were no peaks in this graph during wartime that I can remember. Needless to say these figures were disputed by some (not the lack of peaks during wartime, but that innovation is limited).
The only hard figures I have ever seen showed that less inventions are being made each year relative to the population indicating we are reaching a plateau at some point in the future. There were no peaks in this graph during wartime that I can remember. Needless to say these figures were disputed by some (not the lack of peaks during wartime, but that innovation is limited).
Most of the biological sciences suffer during wartime, flourish in peace. War has never done evolutionary theory, plant breeding, agricultural research, ecological research - to pick obvious examples - the slightest good.
The atomic bomb, like other technological innovations of past wars, represented to its inventors a distraction from science - a sidetrack from science, not its furtherance. Feynman, for example, is quoted in his biography discussing the insecurity he felt returning to science after taking so much time off in the bomb project - he was worried that he had fallen behind, could no longer contribute to cutting edge physics.
Germany's devotion to war footing in the runup to WWII did great damage to its world-dominating scientific efforts of the time - driving out a whole slew of the world's best scientists, undermining the work of the rest, isolating Germany from the scientific community. Hitler had the means of world domination in his hands - he threw it away for military gear.
Russian science likewise, in the Cold War, suffered greatly from the influence of war and combat footing on its research - T D Lysenko could never have done what he did to Russian biological science in a climate of peace and open borders.
This does not absolve the scientists from moral and ethical responsibility, however - and not just the basic amoral mad ones, like Teller, but the conscience stricken ones, like Oppenheimer. If you give a shotgun to a chimp, you are responsible for the holes in the ceiling.
The atomic bomb, like other technological innovations of past wars, represented to its inventors a distraction from science - a sidetrack from science, not its furtherance. Feynman, for example, is quoted in his biography discussing the insecurity he felt returning to science after taking so much time off in the bomb project - he was worried that he had fallen behind, could no longer contribute to cutting edge physics.
Germany's devotion to war footing in the runup to WWII did great damage to its world-dominating scientific efforts of the time - driving out a whole slew of the world's best scientists, undermining the work of the rest, isolating Germany from the scientific community. Hitler had the means of world domination in his hands - he threw it away for military gear.
Russian science likewise, in the Cold War, suffered greatly from the influence of war and combat footing on its research - T D Lysenko could never have done what he did to Russian biological science in a climate of peace and open borders.
This does not absolve the scientists from moral and ethical responsibility, however - and not just the basic amoral mad ones, like Teller, but the conscience stricken ones, like Oppenheimer. If you give a shotgun to a chimp, you are responsible for the holes in the ceiling.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
I always thought that war causes weapons..
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
But would people go to war anyway, using sticks and stones if they had to. Isn't that what they did in earlier days, invent weapons to make war with ?
Its not like peaceful people invented weapons just for the heck of it.. and they got mind controlled by the weapons once they made them.. :shrug:
Typically simplistic.
Are you telling us that N.Ireland, the Arab/Israeli conflict aren't to do with politics, history and arbitrary boundaries.
Sorry..I can't find the delete button on here...otherwise ALL of Enmos posts and the mad ramblings of Stryder and his absurd theories would fast gou up in smoke..bit like firewaorks really.
Err.my point was directed at Enmos and not the fragrant SAM.
I doubt whether we really need hard figures because its blatently obvious from Penicillin to Radar to Nuclear Weaponry..and that at the very least innovations in science are moved on a pace during wartime, whereas in peacetime its much more leisurely.
As I said...what have the Swiss given us?...the Cuckoo Clock!
I'll expect your replies to come on the hour, every hour.
I doubt whether we really need hard figures because its blatently obvious from Pennicillin to Radar to Nuclear Weaponry..that at the very least innovations in science are moved on at a pace whereas in peacetime its much more leisurely.
As I said...what have the Swiss given us?...the Cuckoo Clock!
I'll expect your replies to come on the hour, every hour.
Very good, but still wrong.
Radar - installed on German Rhine ferries around 1910 - not war.
Penicillin - Fleming 1928 - not war.
Nuclear weapons - proposed pre WWII (which is why the French were trying to collar uranium in the thirties) - not war.
Innovations in science?
You fail to distinguish between science and technology, and even then those in charge of the war are interested more in what can be done NOW rather than innovations that will work wonders but won't be available until next week.
Better is the enemy of good.
As for the Swiss, hmm, most feared mercenaries throughout Europe for a very long time.
What did they develop during their militaristic period?
We must stop meeting like this, Oli...at this rate everytime I open the wardrobe I'll find you in there staring blankly.
Everything patently obvious to the rest of us brings the same parrot-like reply from you..'where is the evidence?'
Can't you be a bit more original...heres an idea...how about YOU providing evidence?
Stupidity always freaks me out.
Because what is so "blatantly obvious" often turns out to be completely false.
Ooops, you made the assertion, you're supposed to back it up.
Or are we just to accept your "facts" (which you make up on the spot) every time?
All hail Billy, inventor of facts, accept his word without question...
I'll go through them one by one..
Radar
The war precipitated research to find better resolution, more portability and more features for the new defence technology. Post-war years have seen the use of radar in fields as diverse as air traffic control, weather monitoring, astrometry and road speed control.
It has been said that radar won the war for the Allies in World War II. While that’s an overstatement, it is true that radar had a huge impact on how World War II was fought on both sides.
The threat of bombing revived interest in a technology that had been invented several decades earlier but not developed—radar.
So thats on ship thats just been sunk..goodbye the SS. Oli. the slowest ship in the Ocean.
.........I'll be back later
Ooh a lengthy quote? And no source.
So why was radar not developed in WWI if war drives science?
No threat of bombing?
Again, you fail to distinguish between science and technology.
The basic research was done before WWII (i.e the resolution and portability issues).
Nope, but that had severe bombing raids, not just threatened but actual.
So why was radar not developed in WWI if war drives science?
No threat of bombing?
Again, you fail to distinguish between science and technology.
The basic research was done before WWII (i.e the resolution and portability issues).
So the, for example, Spanish Civil war led to innovations in radar?
Nope, but that had severe bombing raids, not just threatened but actual.
Although I have to give you "credit" for imagination.
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
The Renaissance/Reformation/Enlightenment has been going on for 500 years. Like any other era it has had its periods of war and peace. This is the era in which the scientific method, science academies, university courses in science and science journals have become a dominant force in human culture and the world economy. During that time many paradigm-shifting new technologies have been invented for peaceful purposes, including industry, the harnessing of chemical energy (especially to vehicles), electronic communication (which made music an integral part of our lives), computers, and all of modern medicine including asepsis, vaccination, antibiotics and heart surgery. Only bits of these technologies were driven by the needs of war, such as the assembly line as an element of industry and jet propulsion as an element of chemical-to-kinetic energy conversion. Nuclear physics is probably science's only major regret, and it can be argued that the gamble paid off: nuclear weapons have only been deployed once and since then they have been a force for a nail-biting, gut-wrenching peace, but peace nonetheless. Every war since WWII has been damped by the common desire on all sides not to escalate to nuclear. My high-and-mighty homeland abandoned the Vietnam War rather than take the nuclear option.
Hey they also gave us chocolate, the most important invention of the last ten thousand years. Chocolate as we know it (not the "cocoa bean soup" the Aztecs drank) cannot be made without chemical engineering.
The Romans were excellent, innovative civil engineers: highways, sewers, aqueducts. To this day the standard gauge of railways is the standardized track of the wheels on an Imperial Roman chariot. (The width of two horses' asses, which still drive many government projects.
) But they were not noteworthy as scientists. A minor point in this discussion but worth noting for the sake of accuracy on a science forum.
Bad as these were, they pale in comparison to the total obliteration of the civilization of Ancient Egypt, which was done in the name of Allah because they were "infidels." And to the total obliteration of the civilizations of the Aztecs and Incas, which had more complex causes but would not have been total without the fanatical urgings of Pope Urban. It was religion that inspired the Spaniards' unforgivable decision to destroy their art and merely acquire the value of the gold, rather than preserving it and possessing its far greater value as art.
And I have spoken before of the rationality of blaming the excesses of communism on the Christian philosophy that god will take care of those who don't do their part to support the economy. No Confucian would make such an absurd statement.
In addition to the incalculable loss to human culture caused by the armies of Abraham, in terms of sheer violence and loss of life, Jung summed it up: "No wars in history have been as bloody as those among the Christian nations."
PENICILLIN
Fleming was convinced that penicillin could not last long enough in the human body to kill pathogenic bacteria and stopped studying penicillin after 1931, but restarted some clinical trials in 1934 and continued to try to get someone to purify it until 1940.
While penicillin had been discovered pre-war by Sir Alexander Fleming, it took the war to force companies to develop a way of making the highly effective medicine on an industrial scale. Credit for this goes to Howard Florey and Ernst Chain for making significant progress in showing the in vivo bactericidal action of penicillin and many soldiers wounded in combat had both men and their team to thank. For this research and achievement, Florey, Chain, and Fleming shared the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1945. By the end of the war, such was the research into penicillin that several strains were developed. Also the 1945 version of penicillin was some 20 times more potent that the 1939 version.
Billy 2 Oli 0
..and hey..its only half time.
Ooh a lengthy quote? And no source.
So why was radar not developed in WWI if war drives science?
Too busy inventing Machine Guns and the production of Poison Gas which came on leaps and bounds you'll be pleased to know. Arguably Submarines although if you wanted to you could trace the idea to Da Vinci.
Not to mention Tanks of course...who could survive without the good ole tank..perfect for parking in Inner Cities!
And all the techological advances needed for Mass Production of armaments!
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Whats up Billy, care to explain yourself ?