It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What held us back, technologically, for so long??

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 12:06 AM
reply to post by minkmouse

My position is nothing more than a hunch from a multitude of angles, when I say history I refer to places such as Gobekli tepe, Puma Punku, The pyramids of China, the Mahabharata and the ruins of Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro.

According to science we have been behaviorally modern as homo sapiens for 50,000 years. If we can do what we have in the 5000 or so years of history we are familiar with and we see the perils just a few decades of high technology can produce for the species I believe we have been there before and lost our gamble with ourselves.
edit on 15-3-2012 by LaughingatHumanity because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:00 AM
Communication and literacy are probably the two biggest factors.

Consider that knowledge and education were kept from the general population as a form of control by the churches of old, and then governments as churches relinquished control (or have they?).

Once the ability to communicate was advanced by the invention of the printing press, technology started to advance at a quicker pace, and has been exponential in advancements since.

However, I believe we will reach a limit of advancement for a couple reasons - raw materials shortages and the limitations of the human mind. You can make computers faster and better, but can you make brains do the same? There has to be a limit somewhere. People will increasingly need to specialize their expertise and pool their knowledge, which is happening now.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:44 AM
reply to post by chr0naut

The answer to your question is about as simple, as the question is.

The answer is Verner von Braun.

The more complex answer is 9/11.

The relation between the two is, that people want to believe the official story of 9/11 and accept the protection of the few. In this concept, there has been stagnation in science ... because if you want security, it means that all changes must be stopped. So, people lived for thousands of years, wanting God to protect them from evil ... from change.

Verner von Braun, is who made NASA. He is the man who launched the vehicle into space, and made NASA what it is. When he died, NASA more or less died with him. Today NASA is nothing more than a bunch of jerks who are making a lot of nonsense, to tell us all that we are living in a stable world, instead of pressing for change and forward motion.

For a brief time, the Verner von Brauns of this world, had a chance of brillianse. As they did, over two thousand years ago ... but as it says in the legend.

Do not fret ... as it was before, so shall it be again.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:50 AM
It doesn't really make sense; ''why''.
Only sense for me is the amount of people, somehow this line was flat for millions of years then since about the year ''0'', we see fast progress and the amount of people on earth. (except of course some ancient civilizations which have shown some advancements but vanished).

edit on 15-3-2012 by Plugin because: (no reason given)

Now my own theory is that kinda like with peak oil, we may have a peak human, which means at some point, the line which has gone upwards very fast in a very short time, may go down as well as fast at some point. This because it's not sustainable.
edit on 15-3-2012 by Plugin because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:56 AM
In my view war has been the mother of invention for the human race, with some of the tech devised now being used for peaceful means..

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 04:13 AM

Originally posted by zerotime
Religion held us back. And I'm not bashing religion just stating a fact. Religion is still fighting science tooth and nail on any modern advances.
edit on 14-3-2012 by zerotime because: (no reason given)

Actually it was Christianity alone that set the stage for our technological revolutionary times.

The number one threat to technological advancement is, and has always been: Cheap labor.

The Ancient Greeks where the first to develop mechanical computers and the steam engine. The never did anything with either of them(aside as special effect pieces, and for their pagan idolism) because they had access to cheap labor.

Look at the technology involved in harvesting potato's and corn compared to lettuce, tomato's and oranges. Potato's and Corn, traditionally grown in places with little population had a greater degree of technological advancement when compared against crops grown in areas with access to large, cheap labor pool.

As per your misguided belief that religion held back technology, you fail to acknowledge that the upper echelon of the church was composed of members from the aristocratic. People who where so obsessed with control and order that they had laws restricting what the "peasants" could or could not wear.

Given the fact that it has just been established that your too ignorant of history to give an adequate reply to support your statement; it is best if you ignore these topics all together and stick to the ones in which you do have some degree of proficiency.
I support the notion that Christianity set the stage for all the technologies around us on the fact that Christianity, once liberated from the nobility, ended slavery and stood against the exploitation of labor in all the countries it had dominance in.

It may not be perfect, but it is a great improvement over the slavery of pagan and islamic nations that is still going on today(in pagan, and some islamic nations).
edit on 15-3-2012 by korathin because: (no reason given)

I further support this notion that Christianity is responsible for our advances based upon the effect that the Churches support of 1 man, 1 woman for marriage has positively influenced society as well.

In Islamic nations, and nations/cultures without marriage(or enable polygamy), a sizable amount of men spend their lives never knowing love or family. This causes them to have no real motivation in life, no incentive to advance oneself because wealth in those nations has much more to do with family and connections then actual hard work.

Hence why so many young muslim men are willing to blow themselves up by the hundreds if not thousands.

As marriage is being dismantled, and the upper middle class and upper class are hoarding civilizations wealth, the same type of disenchantment is infecting males in Western Civilization(it is often refereed to as the "peter pan syndrome" by narcissistic man-haters).

Look at everyone who "got rich" these last few decades. They were all born into the upper middle class, or lower upper class; and they all used a combination of thievery and pre-existing wealth to bully their way to the top.
What incentive is there for a large swath of the population to innovate, if it will be stolen out from underneath them by a spoiled rich boy like Zuckerberg or Gates?

edit on 15-3-2012 by korathin because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 04:22 AM
reply to post by chr0naut

Many point to religion. Science in itself had to take on the same type of direction to even achieve existence and success. The powering religious factions in the most dominantly educated were of the upper class. It was not until social aspects became enlightened with concern for the broader aspect of all things and what makes things do what they do and how to repair them. Humanity has pondered this from the onset of it's existence from what we know of our ancient history and realistically speaking, our history and science was all based on guess work, trial and error, persistence and pushing the threshold of new questions in a more open manner.

Only when society was more exposed to these things was it at a point of evolution within science and arts that we flourished really. I believe we forgot more than we could ever imagine for the fact that said knowledge was not as expansive as it became in the 1400 hundreds and beyond. I read somewhere once where we lost between 800 to 1200 years of scientific advancement and growth due to Christianity alone according to history just based on the heretic standards of the past.

If the Technological singularity hypothesis ever comes within the near future to perhaps the next 100 years or so. I think we will see a technological existence that exceeds social restraints and religious doctrine. This could be very dangerous as much as positive for the human species.

I think our sense of history as well as time with regard to dating and existence is quite questionable still but science strives to perfect and understand those components of humanity for truth as much as any organized method can.
edit on 3-15-2012 by Flint2011 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 04:45 AM
reply to post by chr0naut

Zero, complex numbers, irrational numbers, and such are prime culprits.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:59 AM
I'm seeing two requirements.

1. The scientific journal.
Up until a couple of hundred years ago, learning was done in isolation. Mostly, anyone else had to start from scratch and relearn the same things all over again. Progress cant happen that way.
And for the most part, anyone who did write a book waited 20 years and then published a complete summary of everything they knew about that (and some other) topics. Thats way too slow for speedy progress. Especially if you had to wait until printing presses were invented to get a decent number of copies distributed.
But with the scientific journal, you could discover something and let everyone know about it in a much shorter time. And people could quickly respond, and question it with "ah yes, but..."
People no longer had to reinvent the wheel every new generation.

2. Understanding electricity.
And by "understanding", I mean to the point where you could make reliable batteries, use coils of wire to create movement, use movement to create electricity, motors, generator, ammeters, voltmeters.
Pretty much everything we have today - transport, lighting, communications, and more, need this understanding before they could be made to work.

Before these two things, "progress" cant happen.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 06:35 AM

Originally posted by bladerunner44

Originally posted by wlord
lack of electricity ? i dont know, thank god for tesla.

You are correct, the mass distribution of electricity was the fundamental enabling technology that drove the exponential growth in most of our advancements in the last 100 years.

I'm sure oil had a play in this too.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 06:48 AM

Originally posted by zerotime
Religion held us back. And I'm not bashing religion just stating a fact. Religion is still fighting science tooth and nail on any modern advances.
edit on 14-3-2012 by zerotime because: (no reason given)

Add to that the simple fact that religion held dibs on science and literacy for centuries. Not only for power-mongering purposes, but the religious institutions were the only places where one could learn to read and write (!!), the most important thing in progression is the dilligent writing-down of progress, inventions, descriptions, etc. Monks did that, and quite precisely so.

In the older days, religion ié 'the catholic church, and even the Eastern variations of abrahamic religions, placed quite the emphasis on gathering knowledge and understanding, if only to understand "the glory of god" more.
Monasteries have been the institutions of knowledge of old. The aversion towards science only came when power became more important than knowledge, and inquisitive minds (usually attracted to the rather intellectual environment that monasteries offered) became mistrusted, hunted even.
The inquisition was the downfall of The Church as an institute of knowledge.
Knowledge has always been seen by those hungering for power, as something extremely dangerous. A fact that has not changed. (Hence the recent attacks on the democratizing of knowledge via SOPA and ACTA)

The ability to store, and convey info in a reasonably unaltered state propels a society forward. It starts with a bit of info, which creates more knowledge, which gets accellerated by ever more knowledge added to the original knowledge.

It's a curve that starts with a slow incline, but then accellerates upwards evermore. Printing made knowledge available to more people, more people could learn to read, because printing made books available to the bourgeoisie. Books no longer were extremely precious and expensive objects, dilligently copied by hand.

The spreading of printed words gave birth to the class of non-clerical scientists, who, on their turn spread science amongst more societies in western Europe.. Well suffice to say, the accelleration of knowledge is now on turbo-boost due to the ever-more efficient ways of conveying knowledge to everyone: ICT, and The Internet specifically.

Stuff like that nèver goes at a constant rate, but rather in a 2-4-8-16-32 etc etc kind of way
And this ends the "On to the Singularity" class for today,

edit on 3/15/2012 by diakrite because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 06:59 AM

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by zerotime
Religion held us back. And I'm not bashing religion just stating a fact. Religion is still fighting science tooth and nail on any modern advances.
edit on 14-3-2012 by zerotime because: (no reason given)

I don't think there is less religion today. It has just moved around.

And many of the scientists, philosophers & technicians who ushered in this "age of knowledge" were, themselves, highly religious.

Perhaps it is a particular facet of religion which held us back but is now absent.

It is interesting to note that the Reformation preceded the change fairly closely (though, perhaps, not close enough to be a factor).

It was a nice try but I think that answer is too general and not actually historically justifiable.

Are you serious!
Have you ever heard of the word BLASPHEMY. Well, it was used by the Hierarchy in RELIGION, and it was very useful for hundreds of years. (Religion was to blame) along with all the scaremongering that science was the devil's work. They beat, burnt, drowned and even tortured people for being smart or something the dumb-asses in religion, didnt understand.
Us "common folk" werent allowed the knowledge of the so-called gods.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 07:27 AM
The argument can be made that religion kept the light of civilization burning during the dark ages following the fall of the Roman Empire. At a time when most of the citizenship was illiterate, the monasteries of Europe acted as depositories of the knowledge of the ancient Greek and Roman scholars. Monks translated and transcribed all kinds of ancient texts and kept them from being lost forever.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 07:28 AM
I think of it like this, what would have happened if tesla had been on a planet who would have thrown funding at him because they knew he was going to benefit everyone.
And not kept on a leash of National security or a funding ND agreement for the major bankers of the day.
Government is what holds us back, it is not holding the government back though, they believe they are a breed apart and only serve to protect themselves from us.
It annoys me that government continually attempts to disempower the people, while empowering itself and them feeling belligerance and animosity towards a group of people who do not know any better, in part because of the educational aspect of keeping them stupid and complacent, while also assaulting them with chemicals in the water supply and other electro-magnetic interference with peoples free will and functioning.
The people in power of this world are the biggest bunch of emotional retards ever to have been here.
They don't want you to have it, thats why you don't have it, it's that simple, it is nothing to do with religion in the 21st century.
They don't care that you may have greater aspirations if you were not dumbed down and interfered with, they suffer from massive averice, they needssss it for themsssselvessssesss, sick backward anachronistic retard mongoloid inbred arselickers.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 07:43 AM
I want to change my answer, after reading the past few pages, and thinking about this honestly.

I've come to the flat out complete answer of 42. Ok j/k Purely related though,

It's ENTERTAINMENT, all alone that has stifled us.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:13 AM
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and suggest that what's been "holding us back" isn't religion, capitalism, international banking, or even the Freemasons.

Very few new technologies stand on their own. As a quick and dirty example, Hero of Alexandria described a steam engine...but actually building a practical steam engine had to wait on the development of good enough metals, metal fabrication techniques, and bearings. The metal had to wait on mining and refining techniques to be developed. See where this is going? Ideas have to wait on the hardware to catch up...which is one reason we've seen such massive advances in the last few decades. We're getting better and better at fabricating the hardware to bring ideas into reality, and we've got better and better ways to share data over larger and larger areas, which cuts down on the time wasted re-inventing the wheel.

It's not a conspiracy, it's simply that knowledge and technology build on existing work.

Just my dull, not-at-all-exciting $0.02 (adjusted for inflation, of course)

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:14 AM
greed, plain and simple

2nd line

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:25 AM
fear of the unkown

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:58 AM
the scientific approach is relatively new. Up to that point, there did not exist research as such, mostly guessworking. Also education has not been widely avaiable to the public until the 19th century.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:04 AM
but all these things just prove that we ran into the block AFTER the 1900th century, I mean Smartphones and Tablets are cool and all but, I don't want something thinner so I can break it and need a repair... I want Innovation, which we had a ton of from 1900 - 2000, past 12 years we have introduced smartphones, and social networking, Ads to target every aspect of our internet habbits, and more entertainment ideas.

Have we ventured from Oil, improved upon the tech we already have much? Some would say yes, but others would say no, since we are still using it, and it in return is still causing issue.

Education didn't spark innovation ( we are a hugely educated society now ) yet we don't have the freely exchange of ideas built upon others anymore, people are too afraid of having theirs stolen and another profiting off such. We exchanged ideas more freely in the past, and had more focus and drive it seemed.

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in