Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Peter Bjørn Perlsø)
- Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 23:38:54 +0200
nospam <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Peter Bjørn Perlsø wrote:
You're invoking the "Post Hoc ergo Propter Hoc" fallacy. Just because
somethin came *after* something else does not mean it is *because* of
this.
Then take this: USSR launched Sputnik and Gagarin. They had in the beginning
a big technological advantage in space race. Why USA overpass them ?
Because the USA had all the scientists that fled from Germany before
World War II?
The same is valid for microwave technology. When Stalin gave as a gift to US
embassy the emblem with passive microwave transmitter, US engineers
inspected it and did not figured out what it is. Even when proofs that
secret informations goes out they were not able to figure out what it is.
Only year later a team of the best US scientists inspecting the device
figured out that geeeee, this CAN be a microwave passive transmitter.
But 30 years later, US overpassed USSR in microwave technology too.
Why this happen ?
Never heard of that story, could you point to some more materail on it?
No computers. internet, satelites, optical fiber, moon landing. Heck we
should still believe the Earth it is the center of the universe and the
moons and stars are painted on crystal spheres revolving around the flat
Earth which float on the ocean on back of 4 gigant turtles.
Actually, democracy has ponly been widespread since World War I.
But England, France and other European countries along with US had
various forms of democracy 200 years ago.
Certainly not to the extent that most democrats would acknowledge that
they were democracies to this day.
And this is from where the
technology/scientific advancement and innovation came from.
Coincidence ?
I disagree - because a nation changes its form of rule does not
magically make its populace more brilliant.
--
regards, Peter Bjørn Perlsø
http://haxor.dk
http://liberterran.org
http://haxor.dk/fanaticism/
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: nospam
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- References:
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: royls
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: ruetheday@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Robert Kolker
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: royls
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: nospam
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- From: nospam
- Re: Definition of "rich"?
- Prev by Date: Re: Definition of "rich"?
- Next by Date: Re: Money supply and national debt -- need help on this subject
- Previous by thread: Re: Definition of "rich"?
- Next by thread: Re: Definition of "rich"?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|