[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Technosoul, Sribbler, Not sure if Albert came up with his ideas because he wanted to help out the war effort with nuclear bombs or not, but to save time I will not question your data by demanding proof.

Good thing you're NOT demanding proof, because I didn't even MENTION Einstein. But for the record, Einstein was a devoted pacifist and didn't write the famous letter to Roosevelt until AFTER Leo Szilard and Edward Teller convinced them that Germany would end up with the A-Bomb. Einstein, being Jewish, was terrified Hitler would get the bomb first. Besides, it was Enrico Fermi and J. Robert Oppenheimer (and a few others who I can't recall right now) who were the big shots behind the A-Bomb.

I already agreed that some war technology was also later used for peaceful purposes. This I see happening to the greatest degree within the past 75 years and not as evident in the whole scope of human history.

How did you arrive at 75 years?

In fact it might be that because America has not had many wars within our borders for so long that we could develope our progress to it's present level. If your theory is correct then all countries that have had on-going wars should likewise have advanced techologies and progress simular to ours and I could perhaps note that this is not self-evident world wide.

Don't you think those countries WOULD have developed advanced weaponry if they COULD? You are not considering the reality of the situation. You leave out the four things necessary for such weapons development. A strong government, a large military, the necessary resources and a lot of money. WE had all four. So did Germany, Japan and England, among others. Now look at the countries which were routinely invaded. Most of them were lucky if they had TWO of the necessary factors. And I didn't even mention the scientific minds behind the weapons, most of whom were concentrated in the abovementioned countries.

It is somewhat evident that the computer is an evolution of the typewriter, the TV set, and chips in those transister radios we got from Japan a while back. Although the CIA had gaint computers with large reel to reel tapes the smaller desk models were likewise influenced by "light shows" for greatfull dead concerts, used to simulate LSD effects on our mind.

I hope the rest of your technical knowledge isn't as faulty as this. If you think the typewriter evolved directly into the computer, I doubt I could explain to you how it DIDN'T. However, FWIW the earlier analog computers weren't even accessed with a keyboard.

(sigh) The smaller desk model computers (minicomputers) were originally the Commodore PET (Personal Electronic Transactor) and the IBM PC. The Greatful Dead's audiences were influenced by colored oils on an overhead projector.

People being interested in observing nature and learning from nature was hardly the result of war. History books should give thanks to the environmentalists and naturalists for that.

That makes no sense at all.

And so I have grave doubts about just how important the missuse of technology for war could be framed as being important for the gadget industry, after all, Japan managed to advance in that field in short order without a big military.

(sigh-sigh) You have that totally backward. The technology for war was not MISused at all. It was CREATED for war, and used for peaceful, uses AFTERWARDS, and I don't refer to the technologies I mentioned, such as the space program as "gadgets".
And guess what, you are right about Japan. Japan DIDN'T have any military when they successfuly marketed these "gadgets"...because we had already BEATEN them in WW2!! THAT'S why they didn't have a military, we wouldn't LET THEM have one, mainly because they were kicking our asses when they DID!
And before you mention Japan and the Transistor again, be aware that it was invented in 1948 by Bell Labs and only marketed by the Japanese.

You speculated that the Greek-Roman science culture might have put us on the moon only 50 years sooner to debunk my speculation it might have happened in the 1800s, lets see, 1899 plus 50 years brings us to 1949 (nuclear age), so our speculatons in time are less then perhaps about 15 years apart. Drop in the bucket time wise, I would think.

I would think 1899 is pushing it a bit when describing the 1800's, but whatever.

So that is my come-back rebuttle, whatcha think? Technosoul.

Needs just a smidgen more research, my friend.