NationStates Jolt Archive

What is the most significant event of the second half of the 20th century.

How has it altered the world?

* Founding of the European Union - 1950
* Watson and Crick discover the structure of DNA - 1953
* Invention of the microchip - 1958
* Apollo 11 landing on the moon - 1969
* Beginning of the Internet (ARPANET) - 1969
* Beginning of the AIDS epidemic - 1970s/1980s
* Eradication of smallpox, humanity's greatest killer - 1980
* Fall of Communism in Russia - 1991
* Other

Communism didn't really fall in Russia. For details, read New Lies For Old and The Perestroika Deception by Anatoliy Golitsyn, a Soviet defector.

Hands down the AIDS pandemic. Or epidemic if you prefer, but that isn't true.

When the history of the 20th century is written centuries from now I believe that humanity's first trip to another world, our moon, will be seen as the most significant historical event of the last 500 years.

That is assuming that we eventually return to space and the whole venture isn't wasted.

Easy, I was born. After that the European Union and the fall of the USSR.

When the history of the 20th century is written centuries from now I believe that humanity's first trip to another world, our moon, will be seen as the most significant historical event of the last 500 years.

That is assuming that we eventually return to space and the whole venture isn't wasted.

But then again, the microchip was needed for sustained space travel to be possible.

When the history of the 20th century is written centuries from now I believe that humanity's first trip to another world, our moon, will be seen as the most significant historical event of the last 500 years.
After the atomic bomb and antibiotics, of course...

The development of a systematic method of sequencing genomes. This development will eventually make the discovery of atomic energy look like child's play.

I think the landing on the moon, the future of humankind is certainly not going to be one bound on this earth.

But then again, the microchip was needed for sustained space travel to be possible.

Actually, NASA sent Apollo to the moon with sliderules and less computing power than you or I are using right now.

I also believe the trip to the moon is more significant that atomic weapons or antibiotics, assuming, of course, we don't use those atomic weapons to destroy ourselves. Then they would take on a great deal of significance.

The development of a systematic method of sequencing genomes. This development will eventually make the discovery of atomic energy look like child's play.

I thought of that, but figured the key to genome sequencing began with Watson and Crick. The actual impact will be most significant as a 21st century development. You are quite correct in its potential to alter all life on the planet.

I thought of that, but figured the key to genome sequencing began with Watson and Crick. The actual impact will be most significant as a 21st century development. You are quite correct in its potential to alter all life on the planet.
Is anyone else terrified by that? It's like humanity is a baby fiddling with a gun it found lying on a table...

Is anyone else terrified by that? It's like humanity is a baby fiddling with a gun it found lying on a table...

Oh, inteed. Between genetic engineering and nanotechnology, I'm more fascinated and frightened than nuclear technology could ever hope to produce in me.

Oh, inteed. Between genetic engineering and nanotechnology, I'm more fascinated and frightened than nuclear technology could ever hope to produce in me.
I wholly agree, except for the nanotechnology. I really don't know much about that, but it seems to pale in comparison to altering the very "threads" that governs all life. And even some non-life.

A lot of these are misunderstood.

What about smallpox? Surely that has major significance. But since we got rid of it, and there is no evidence today, we don't think about it.

Hear about the plan to eradicate AIDS? YAY! After that, humanity can go f*** like bunnies! Population explosion!

I'll put them in order of importance

1. Invention of the microchip - 1958
2. Beginning of the Internet (ARPANET) - 1969
3. Beginning of the AIDS epidemic - 1970s
4. Watson and Crick discover the structure of DNA, 1953
5. Apollo 11 landing on the moon, 1969
6. Eradication of smallpox, humanity's greatest killer, 1980
7. Founding of the European Union, 1950
8. Fall of Communism in Russia, 1991

Communism didn't really fall in Russia. For details, read New Lies For Old and The Perestroika Deception by Anatoliy Golitsyn, a Soviet defector.
I am reminded of that Simpsons episode:

UN guy: The USSR? I thought you had fallen!

"Russian" ambassador: That's what we wanted you to think! Mwoohahaha!

*Lenin rises from masoleum*

I wholly agree, except for the nanotechnology. I really don't know much about that, but it seems to pale in comparison to altering the very "threads" that governs all life. And even some non-life.

Well let me put it this way; read Prey by Michael Crighton and you'll realize how closely nanotechnology and genetic engineering resemble eachother. More to the point, how complementary they could be.

I read somewhere that some israeli scientist has created a cellular computer that uses DNA as a programming language and RNA as software. :eek:

Hear about the plan to eradicate AIDS? YAY! After that, humanity can go f*** like bunnies! Population explosion!
Too late!

Is anyone else terrified by that? It's like humanity is a baby fiddling with a gun it found lying on a table...
I'm not terrified of it, but it is certainly a matter for concern. We have allowed our technology to rapidly outpace our moral philosophy and our grandchildren will pay the freight.

It is very easily the invention of the microchip. That is probably bigger than the invention of the printing press. It is opened up an era of information that is unprecendented.

Who voted for the fall of the USSR?

I'll put them in order of importance

1. Invention of the microchip - 1958
2. Birth of Brad Potts - 1982
3. Watson and Crick discover the structure of DNA, 1953
4. Beginning of the Internet (ARPANET) - 1969
5. Founding of the European Union, 1950
6. Beginning of the AIDS epidemic - 1970s
7. Apollo 11 landing on the moon, 1969
8. Eradication of smallpox, humanity's greatest killer, 1980
9. Fall of Communism in Russia, 1991



Fixed it for you.

Well let me put it this way; read Prey by Michael Crighton and you'll realize how closely nanotechnology and genetic engineering resemble eachother. More to the point, how complementary they could be.
Isn't Michael Crichton the author of The Andromeda Strain? I wouldn't refer him as a source for fact. It was simply demiologically absurd what he talked about there.

I read somewhere that some israeli scientist has created a cellular computer that uses DNA as a programming language and RNA as software. :eek:
Well then some Israeli scientist is probably lying. That is such a fanciful idea with out current level of technology. We are nowhere near being able to construct anything like that. And that would make no sense, because RNA is what "produces" proteins. I don't see how that could be analogous to software. But, again, if there is any proof on that, I might consider that to have even a miniscule kernel of truth, but until then I don't believe that at all.

We have allowed our technology to rapidly outpace our moral philosophy and our grandchildren will pay the freight.
Ha! Morals are not the problem at all with genetic engineering, to me. There are far, far worse consequences than outpacing our "moral philosophy".

I'm surprised no one voted for Watson and Crick's discovery of the structure of DNA. It is very possible, perhaps even probable, that information in the future will not be stored on microchips but rather on DNA strands. It is called dip-pen nanolithography.

Eisenhower's doctrine of containment in regards to Communism and his threats of massive retaliation.

It is very possible, perhaps even probable, that information in the future will not be stored on microchips but rather on DNA strands. It is called dip-pen nanolithography.
I doubt that. DNA is fragile in certain ways that microchips are not. One of the reasons immortality will never be possible for anything is because the DNA kind of "unravels" a little with every generation of cells. There isn't any great impact on this, but over time...

Isn't Michael Crichton the author of The Andromeda Strain? I wouldn't refer him as a source for fact. It was simply demiologically absurd what he talked about there.


Well then some Israeli scientist is probably lying. That is such a fanciful idea with out current level of technology. We are nowhere near being able to construct anything like that. And that would make no sense, because RNA is what "produces" proteins. I don't see how that could be analogous to software. But, again, if there is any proof on that, I might consider that to have even a miniscule kernel of truth, but until then I don't believe that at all.

Michael Crighton bases a considerable amount of his fiction on cutting edge science. You can often learn as much about science from his fiction as you can from Scientific American. He's a lot like Arthur C. Clarke that way.

I might google it if I have a few spare moments. But let me ask you this: Have you ever heard of carbon nanotubes? Did you know that there are stronger materials out there than titanium? I didn't. But a 1/8th inch strand of carbon nanotubes can hold 40 tons! :eek: I just learned that yesterday, and I'm still stunned at the implications.

I'm not terrified of it, but it is certainly a matter for concern. We have allowed our technology to rapidly outpace our moral philosophy and our grandchildren will pay the freight.

You should start an inquisition. I heard that Hawking guy actually believes that Earth isn't the center of the universe!!

Michael Crighton bases a considerable amount of his fiction on cutting edge science. You can often learn as much about science from his fiction as you can from Scientific American. He's a lot like Arthur C. Clarke that way.
But it's still fiction. It is written for entertainment, and he takes liberties that no-one trying to document science would ever take.

But let me ask you this: Have you ever heard of carbon nanotubes? Did you know that there are stronger materials out there than titanium? I didn't. But a 1/8th inch strand of carbon nanotubes can hold 40 tons! :eek: I just learned that yesterday, and I'm still stunned at the implications.
I had never heard of those, but that doesn't surprise me all that much. There are many things out there, many present naturally. Spider webs are incredibly impressive to me. If for no other reason than the fact that we cannot even begin to emulate it, let alone synthesise. Titanium is not the strongest material we know of, by the by.

You should start an inquisition. I heard that Hawking guy actually believes that Earth isn't the center of the universe!!

That is rather unfair. Scientists have had a pretty poor track record recently of asking whether or not they should do a thing before they set off to see if they can do a thing. A little more moral self-reflection on the part of the men at Los Alamos would have certainly been welcome.

Scientists have had a pretty poor track record recently of asking whether or not they should do a thing before they set off to see if they can do a thing.
That is because many scientists do research for the sake of itself. Knowledge is the goal, not necessarily practicable knowledge either. Many times this is the case, so taht they can get funding, but the purpose of science should be separate from questions like that. Though I'm against it, I would probably do genetic engineering research if given a good enough chance (when I get out of school, of course). Though it might turn out that I would be terrified by what my research ended up doing, as can be the case. It is not the scientists who need restraint, but the people in power.

Ha! Morals are not the problem at all with genetic engineering, to me. There are far, far worse consequences than outpacing our "moral philosophy".
Perhaps a word or two of explanation ... by "moral philosophy" I am referring to our ability as a species to delay gratification, willingly sacrifice personal gain for the greater good, etc. We find ourselves now in the position of having a loaded gun in a semian hand controlled by the emotions of a reptile.

Perhaps a word or two of explanation ... by "moral philosophy" I am referring to our ability as a species to delay gratification, willingly sacrifice personal gain for the greater good, etc. We find ourselves now in the position of having a loaded gun in a semian hand controlled by the emotions of a reptile.
Ahh, ok, that makes much more sense. I agree with you there. Except that we've simian hands, not "semian" ones...

Ahh, ok, that makes much more sense. I agree with you there. Except that we've simian hands, not "semian" ones...
Thanks for the spell check. :)

You should start an inquisition. I heard that Hawking guy actually believes that Earth isn't the center of the universe!!
:eek: NO!!!! :eek: Where is my pitchfork? :mad:
:D

Apparently the 47 of us voting have collectively determined that, of the items listed, the discovery of DNA was the least important.

Apparently the 47 of us voting have collectively determined that, of the items listed, the discovery of DNA was the least important.

It certainly wasn't as important as aids or the fall of the USSR.

It certainly wasn't as important as aids or the fall of the USSR.

Yet, gene therapy, based upon the work of Watson and Crick, may hold the key to eliminating AIDS and other deadly diseases.

Well, going by the best invention for the past 1,000 (not this one, the 1---), that would have to be Gutenberg's Printing Press. Therefore, the only thing that has become that influential within the 20th century is the advent of the Internet.

Technically 1950 is in the first half of the 20th century. There was now year "0", so the first century AD was 1-100 AD. Therefore the first half would be years 1-50 and the second half would be 51-100. Just to be nit picky.

Apparently, the second half of the 20th century is of more interest to people than the first half.

Yet, gene therapy, based upon the work of Watson and Crick, may hold the key to eliminating AIDS and other deadly diseases.

Yeah, I know. Sarcasm

That is rather unfair. Scientists have had a pretty poor track record recently of asking whether or not they should do a thing before they set off to see if they can do a thing. A little more moral self-reflection on the part of the men at Los Alamos would have certainly been welcome.

I think they may have after the fact. Wasn't it Oppenheimer that said (quoting from a different source), "now I am become death destroyer of worlds".

But it's still fiction. It is written for entertainment, and he takes liberties that no-one trying to document science would ever take.


I had never heard of those, but that doesn't surprise me all that much. There are many things out there, many present naturally. Spider webs are incredibly impressive to me. If for no other reason than the fact that we cannot even begin to emulate it, let alone synthesise. Titanium is not the strongest material we know of, by the by.

While we can't synthesise spider silk directly, a group has managed to put the gene responsible for silk prouction into goats. The proteins that make up the spider silk can then be extracted and made into silk.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30F16FC3A590C758DDDAF0894DA404482

A few missing here...

My birth?
1966 World Cup?
Charles & Diana's wedding?
Tom & Jerry talking for the first time?

COME ON!!! How could you miss any of these off?!

bump

I hope that the moon landing will one day be seen as the most important event of the 20th century, on par with or exceeding the importance of Colombus' journeys to the Western Hemisphere.

We gotta get off this rock.