It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com 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: 5
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   
Good subject OP.... seems a lot of minds at work trying to decipher what has held us back.

I look at like this....

IF we have been held back.... we have only been held back by people who can control us. Otherwise there is no holding back.

In my opinion if Science were not held back then technology would have advanced more than we see today?

Not so sure technology has been "held back".

The leaders of the Scientific community holds the community back due to the lack of respect for the entire Solar System. Yep, I said respect.


I say respect of the entire Solar System because it is a system that controls what happens to our home and us. There are people within the community who could care less about the entire system (including the human race). The ones who try to shed new light are shunned to the side and kept quiet. Why? Control/greed (lack of respect) maybe?

Technologically speaking we have advanced big time over the last 50 years imo. The advancement is not in the peoples favor nor is it in favor for the planet nor the entire Solar System.

We need scientists who work for the entire System, otherwise we are facing another "reset".

Game over... try again.




posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Legion2024
600 years of hunting witches, Imagine where we would be now if those 600 years were more productive.
edit on 14-3-2012 by Legion2024 because: (no reason given)


I dont know if you noticed it... but... we're still "hunting witches"...



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:28 AM
link   
I personally don't believe we have ever been lacking in technology. I think we just use to harness energy in different ways and do different things with it.

I think there are ancient technologies that we are unfamiliar with. I think we took a different technological path.

There is evidence that supports this idea.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Personally, I think religion has helped science, but its the religious nut jobs that take everything out of context and label science as evil just because it hasn't discovered God.

There are things in all kinds of religious books that were revealed long before they were actually verified to be true. Like it or not, science is looking for the ultimate. Whether that be a divine creator or not is still open for discovery, but nevertheless that is the search and that is the fuel.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   
There are many factors that held us back.

But the most critical would be Economic Neccessity.

Imagine if a genius invented handphone technology back in the 13th Century, would it succeed? Doubt so, for the critical mass that can support the manufacture of handphones and its continuance to make it viable is not there. 99% of our ancestors worldwide were slaves.

How could agarian slaves afford handphones, or need it, to support the massive financial outlay of such tech?

As long as the 1% of population whom are the leaders and elites of our world practices slavery, overt or covert, mankind will never progress technologically.

Even if the 1% were to finance war weaponery research, much of that research will never be seen by the masses whom are only slaves, and would never be allowed access to it as the 1% will consider such knowledge dangerous, dangerous to their own selfish rule, as it was then centuries ago where knowledge was forbidden.

Without more brains to critically familiarise with it, use it, provide feedback on mistakes to improve upon it, technology remains stagnant.
edit on 15-3-2012 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by CaptChaos
Advances have been actively held back and suppressed for almost a hundred years. We are being actively suppressed NOW.

I defy anyone to think of something truly new that has been invented since WW2. Even ONE thing, that is not just a refinement of existing tech.


Here's a few:

The science of genetics and recombinant DNA.
Spintronics,
Graphene, Fullerines and other allotropes of Carbon.
Magnetic monopoles,
Superconductivity, and its associated discoveries.
String theory, M theory and Brane theories,
Theoretical dark energy,
Hawking Radiation,
Memory Alloys,
Metamaterials and negative refractive index,
Space Travel,
Kevlar,
Graphite Polymers,
Lasers and Masers,
Nanotechnology,
Neuro-chemistry,

... as you imagine, I could easily go on for ages.


The overwhelming majority of that list are not inventions, just about every single one is either a discovery or an innovation. Some of them haven't even been observed, and some of them are now being shown to be erroneous. In the interest of being thorough, I will demonstrate this for you:

The science of genetics and recombinant DNA. - Discovery.
Spintronics, -Discovery. Nothing useful has come from this yet.
Graphene, Fullerines and other allotropes of Carbon. -Discovery, by definition.
Magnetic monopoles, -Again, discovery. Existed in nature beforehand (if this is shown to be true)
Superconductivity, and its associated discoveries. -You said it yourself.
String theory, M theory and Brane theories, -these are theories, not inventions. Nothing useful has been produced from them yet.
Theoretical dark energy, -Again, not an invention, and useless.
Hawking Radiation, -theory, useless
Memory Alloys, -innovation, they have been refining this one for the last 4 decades at least
Metamaterials and negative refractive index, -discovery. Existed in nature.
Space Travel, -Not an invention theory, or discovery. Shouldn't be on this list at all
Kevlar, -innovation. They had been iteratively improving plastic strength
Graphite Polymers, -Again, an innovation.
Lasers and Masers, -This may be the only invention on this whole list.
Nanotechnology, -Another discovery. Nothing useful has come of this yet
Neuro-chemistry, -This is still in the theoretical stages. Nothing useful blah blah blah....

Out of that whole list, Lasers may be the only real discovery. So no, you couldn't go on for ages. Lasers are quite possibly the only true invention that we have had. There may be a few more, but they have likely been lost to time.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by TerryMcGuire
I once read in a history of science book that one thing that held up true advances in science was a blind reliance on some of Aristotle's work. It was taken for granted that he was such a smart fella but apparently his rep is over blown. One thing was that he thought that the sex of an infant was determined by which way the wind was blowing at birth.

Another was taking his theory on gravity for granted. What I read was that taking his theory axiomatically kept scientific advances hindered for over a thousand years.

Thats what I read anyway.


Your synopsis is exactly correct, and this is exactly what is holding up science now. We are doing the same thing to Einstein, and slowly, but surely, finding out that the man was wrong.

I remember a discussion on a physics forum last month regarding the accuracy of relativity that rapidly degraded into argument. One man asked '10,000 years from now, what equations do you think they will use in physics?' Another said 'The same ones they have been using for the last hundred years'.

It really puts it into perspective; whilst 300 years of science have gotten us way farther than 8000 years of religion have, science has majorly stalled in the last century. Me and my research team are actively digging into why, and it seems that this is a rabbit hole - it gets longer the farther you go. To avoid giving the treatise, science has made a couple of mistakes over the last century and a half that culminated in Einstein. We are just now realizing the stagnation and beginning to backpedal.

Examples:
-Maxwells equations have become a bit like the modern bible, they have been modified so much that, even if the originals were correct, they sure as hell aren't now. Heaviside and Lorentz are guilty of this.
-Back at the turn of the century, there was a debate as to whether the particle or field were more fundamental (this has much wider implications than is immediately obvious). The particle was originally chosen, used for 2/3 or a century, then computers were invented and engineers who were tasked with increasing their speed out of necessity started using a model in which the field was a primitive. We currently are now in a limbo, in which certain professions use one model, and the rest use the other. The particle model culminated in relativity, in which we are slowly tossing out now. Even QED used dualism, 'the particle and field are both equally fundamental'. We have not fully transitioned yet.

So I predict that in 7-15 years, the transition of models will be complete and science will begin advancing again. That is, barring some huge earth ending event



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
Something that I have been thinking about lately, is: [color=82FFE2]Where will it stop?

[color=82FFE2]Will there ever be an end to the growing possibilities of technology?


Technological advancement itself, does not actually progress very rapidly at all. People think the Internet is going forward, as one example, but it is actually in a state of fairly advanced decay, right now. In terms of UNIX, which is still its' primary host operating system, most of the Internet's underlying technology is now close to 50 years old.

People also look at Apple and such, and think there is so much new stuff, but the truth is that we're not really doing anything new at all. We use cellular wireless; Tesla was talking about an ionospheric form of it at the end of the nineteenth century.

Most of what you think is new, is simply an incrementally new re-organisation of existing data; rather than a truly core change in the data processing mechanisms themselves.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by stAtrill
It really puts it into perspective; whilst 300 years of science have gotten us way farther than 8000 years of religion have, science has majorly stalled in the last century.


Ironically, Atheism really doesn't help. Whenever anyone attempting work related to alternative energy is accused of being schizophrenic, it is usually an Atheist from whom the accusation comes. Institutional Atheism (that is, the vocally self-identifying crowd who worship Dawkins and feel it necessary to tell everyone else how right they are, and how wrong the rest of us are) is extremely territorial where science is concerned. They think they are the sole guardians of the definition of science; that it exclusively belongs to them.

I think Capitalism also deserves its' share of the blame for retarding technological progress, as well. Everything in Western society depends on the monetary incentive; if someone isn't paying the bills, nothing gets done. It is an utter abomination for science to be dominated by that kind of thinking; the MIT or BSD licenses are among the last vestiges left of the old idea that scientific research, in order to be impartial, had to also be noncommercial by definition.

If you're forced to rely on a patron in order to do research, you're not going to be telling the truth about your actual findings; you're going to be saying what said patron wants to hear, because you don't want the gravy train to stop running.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Greed, fear, and religion are what is holding humanity back.

Greed = dependence on fossil fuels pushed on us by oil conglomerates who want nothing more than to drain every last bit of money from us with every last drop of oil before releasing another 'miraculous' power source than can be metered and sold at the highest profits.

Fear = In the past we had da Vinci, Einstein, Tesla, Hughes... now we have Snooki. What reward do we give to those who dare try to do something remarkable and extraodinary? Nothing, and if/when they fail, we mock them on the Internet to feed our own envious hatred. We give no one the motivation to excel... look at how society hates those who excel, unless they are athletes/celebrities? It's sickening.

Religion = This one should be obvious. A more advanced humanity would find no comfort in a being we have never seen and whose direct influence has never been accurately and definitevly attributed.

Until we grow up as a species, we will continue to churn in cycles of stagnation/discovery/decline/repeat.
edit on 15-3-2012 by Dreine because: typo



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by lampsalot
I actually think technological growth peaked in the period from 1960-1995 and has since slowed down. Cultural change too. I mean how different is 2012 from the better part of the 90s in terms of the music and popular fashion and culture? Not very much.

I would say that is more of a fact than a belief.
What has changed our life drastically lately besides internet?? Absolutely nothing..
Most of the so called inventions of today are mainly just refined versions of old inventions.
There is nothing in last decades that can compare to the automobile, rocket propulsion, computers, railroads, television and so on.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
It wasn't until the late middle ages that Europeans spread all over the world and made war global. The first World War was fought in the 1700's, known as the Seven Years War, and the scale and reach of war had been growing fast prior to this. War is the ultimate force behind technological advancement, and global war creates global advancement. Peace, in the end, leads to stagnation.




in Italy, for thirty years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace – and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.





posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by stAtrill
It really puts it into perspective; whilst 300 years of science have gotten us way farther than 8000 years of religion have, science has majorly stalled in the last century.



I think Capitalism also deserves its' share of the blame for retarding technological progress, as well. Everything in Western society depends on the monetary incentive; if someone isn't paying the bills, nothing gets done. It is an utter abomination for science to be dominated by that kind of thinking; the MIT or BSD licenses are among the last vestiges left of the old idea that scientific research, in order to be impartial, had to also be noncommercial by definition.

If you're forced to rely on a patron in order to do research, you're not going to be telling the truth about your actual findings; you're going to be saying what said patron wants to hear, because you don't want the gravy train to stop running.


Which is why the United States fell behind in pure academic research to the Soviet Union and other command control economies. Oh wait that didn't happen. What happens is that there are more people out there paying money for general research to find and make new stuff for people to buy. Also show me a time period when people were actually building things with the science when it was non commercial?

With regards to people who are talking about a technological plateau are crazy and not looking at reality. The last twenty years have been explosion of greater technology advancement in terms of massive refinement and application of electronic devices not to mention the great progress that was made in medicine. Then you have the actual research science, which is continuing to stack up data, but I think part of the problem is that sciences have become so big and the cutting edge so esoteric to the standard person they feel left out of the sense of scientific progress outside of the obvious gadgets that been constantly appearing on the markets.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Koffee
With regards to people who are talking about a technological plateau are crazy and not looking at reality. The last twenty years have been explosion of greater technology advancement in terms of massive refinement and application of electronic devices not to mention the great progress that was made in medicine.


If you want to think Apple's iGarbage deserves to be considered as examples of legitimate technological progress, then hey, knock yourself out. Personally, I'll pass, however.


Then you have the actual research science, which is continuing to stack up data, but I think part of the problem is that sciences have become so big and the cutting edge so esoteric to the standard person they feel left out of the sense of scientific progress outside of the obvious gadgets that been constantly appearing on the markets.


Because again, giantism and incomprehensibility by laypeople are fantastic markers of positive progress.

I grow extremely weary of having to contend with arrogant, triumphalistic materialists on this forum.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by Koffee
With regards to people who are talking about a technological plateau are crazy and not looking at reality. The last twenty years have been explosion of greater technology advancement in terms of massive refinement and application of electronic devices not to mention the great progress that was made in medicine.


If you want to think Apple's iGarbage deserves to be considered as examples of legitimate technological progress, then hey, knock yourself out. Personally, I'll pass, however.

You can personally pass but there is more to advancement then Iphones (and your displeasure at it doesn't delegitimize the advances we've made in telecoms one of which you're using now), you got better gps systems, more smart materials, refinements of goods that used to be big are now small, medicinal treatments and practices (and I am not just saying pharmaceuticals




Because again, giantism and incomprehensibility by laypeople are fantastic markers of positive progress.

I grow extremely weary of having to contend with arrogant, triumphalistic materialists on this forum.


Let me rephrase my point, there is science advancing, its harder to see from ground level, but people can make an effort to look at what the frontier is and get a basic gist of the idea even if you don't know complex mathematics behind it in say astrophysics.

As for you're growing weary, then don't post and just sit in your chair with a sense smug self superiority, that be effective as your arguments so far. After all isn't this forum just another bit of junk in the iphone variety?


edit on 15-3-2012 by Koffee because: realized I wasn't clear in previous post and edited relevant portion



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Do you happen to know whether any of these top-secret craft are white, cigar shaped objects? Cuz if not, the object I saw on 3/10/12 moving slowly over Richmond, VA at a VERY low altitude (2 other witnesses and myself got quite a good look) would seem to contradict your story.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 

Irrelevance=

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
Something that I have been thinking about lately, is: [color=82FFE2]Where will it stop?

[color=82FFE2]Will there ever be an end to the growing possibilities of technology?


Technological advancement itself, does not actually progress very rapidly at all. People think the Internet is going forward, as one example, but it is actually in a state of fairly advanced decay, right now. In terms of UNIX, which is still its' primary host operating system, most of the Internet's underlying technology is now close to 50 years old.

People also look at Apple and such, and think there is so much new stuff, but the truth is that we're not really doing anything new at all. We use cellular wireless; Tesla was talking about an ionospheric form of it at the end of the nineteenth century.

Most of what you think is new, is simply an incrementally new re-organisation of existing data; rather than a truly core change in the data processing mechanisms themselves.
I posted a few comments, in this thread.
#1
#2
#3

The title of this thread, is a question. I have given my answer, clearly. If you want to disagree with my actual answer, then I will be happy to discuss it.

I will not even attempt to figure out why you chose to focus only on a couple of random questions of mine, instead of addressing my answer to the thread title:
[color=FBFF85]Lack of communication




Originally posted by petrus4

We use cellular wireless; Tesla was talking about an ionospheric form of it at the end of the nineteenth century.
[color=FBFF85]He may have been talking about it, but he wasn't talking about it with someone, while they were on the opposite side of the planet.





edit on 3/15/12 by BrokenCircles because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by chr0naut
Humans have been around for ages (3 million or more years according to current Science) and yet it is only in the last 100 or so years that we have progressed from horse & cart to the Internet & Space.

The start of the upward spike of the application of knowledge could have occurred anywhere, (ancient India, China, the Middle East or Greece), at any time but it seemed to come mainly from Europe and only a few decades ago.

So, what was it? Or conversely, what propelled us forward?




Ahhhh. This is a SUPER EASY answer....and no...it's not the semiconducting transistor and Moore's Law. However...it is a two-answer.

First off....technology has been steadily and consistently increasing by exponential increases forever. Those leaps are just more dramatic now...as is the nature of exponentially growing systems. For example, from the discovery of fire it took 600,000 years to get fire figured out and another 300,000 years to learn how to affix a stone point to the end of a spear instead of just holding it in our hands. 250,000 years later we learned how to make pottery. 10,000 after that...man is walking on the moon. Incredible...isn't it?

The reason is because ALL technology builds off of other technology. That being said...this rate of increase has, indeed continued to speed over time. However, this technology CAN ONLY build upon itself when ideas and technology is exchanged.

Planet wide, civilizations which had access to more waterways and easier travel became more sophisticated than those that did not. Most of Africa remained in pretty simplistic tribal living which the exception of the regions right along the only major, navigable river in all of Africa...the Nile. The rest of the continent is extremely harsh desert, the densest of jungles, and open savannah with a whole lot very dangerous predators. In short...one does not cross Africa on foot unless one has a DAMN good reason to do it.

The Incas flourished along the Amazon. The Mayans around the shallows of the Yucatan. Europe has the Danube and the Rhine. China has the Yangtze. Australia is a vast interior desert...thus Aboriginal life remained pretty simple. It takes a long time to ring Australia in the more kind and temperate coastal areas. You get the picture.

Thus, we see BIG leaps everytime new COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY hits the mainstream. The printing press revolutionized the dissemination of information. So did the Telegraph, telephone, radio, TV, and the Internet. Everytime we figure out better, faster, cheaper, etc. ways to exchange information with one another we make leaps and bounds BEYOND exponential increase...so long as it is a medium available to the masses.

Classical civilizations didn't ring the mediterranean by accident. The inland ocean made travel, trade, and new ideas pretty easy to come by.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Like the first reply religion is a big one... But organized religion hasn't been around since humanity first stepped out of the cave or test tube depending on the way you look at it. I feel our ancestors saw the inherent danger with going down the road we are currently on. Socities riddled with cancer and other diseases brought on by the modern age. War, violance, corruption, pollution, std's, etc, etc, etc. People raping and pilliging the earth for it's resources for there own financial gain. Not saying violence or war didn't exist before now, just saying we have turned it into an art form. With the push of a button we could wipe out all life on this planet.

Granted we live 2 times longer than our ancestors... But can you really call this living? We spend the best years of our life working our butt off just so we can pay for superficial items. Tyler Durden: "The objects you own eventually end up owning you". I ask you. Would you prefer to live in peace and harmony with nature and the people around you and die younger? Or would you rather be caged and shackled to a damn peice of paper for 60 years? Then spend the last few years of your life tucked away in a retirement community waiting to die like some used up race horse... Minus the conjugal visits.


Humanity could have progressed to this modern age numerous times but didn't and I think thats something we should really look into... I dont agree that the modern human brain is somehow more advanced than our ancestors. An under developed brain couldn't construct the pyramids or learn how to read the stars. Not sure if it's just me but most of my life I have felt like something is "off". We have lost our direction our job should be to protect this planet and it's inhabitants not destroy it.

Unfortunatly the only way to reverse this would be to wipe clean the slate and start over. I know very few people that would be willing to do that. But with the current state I think it's inevitable. It WILL happen. We can not continue on like this for very mutch longer.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Just a thought.
Lets say people where just animals for millions and millions of years.
Then at some point, somehow, we got a consious or something that changed us? Or lets say, we didn't even had a language for millions of years? Maybe our progress started after we had a real language and even more important, a written language.
And that's not that old...

If not, it's basicly not possible that we stayed the same for millions of years, without any change really.

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



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join