kristopherb
Protective/Charismatic
well your speaking mishmashOlder than Dirt said:
welsh or british please?
- Thread starter pontypool
- Start date
Aneurism said:Say what you will about Bell being Scottish, but Banting was born in Canada and Best was born in the USA, so in no way can the discovery of insulin be construed as 'Scottish'.
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1923/banting-bio.html
http://www.museevirtuel.ca/Exhibitions/Medicentre/en/best_print.htm
As to what country anyone came from it doesnt really matter. As a Canadian I've always heard that Bell was Canadian and didnt even know he was born in Scottland, I guess each country tries to claim inventors as their own... it would seem that Scotts (primarily), Canadians, and Americans have some sort of 'claim' to him. If you want to take pride in an invention, invent something yourself
Except a country cannot "claim" an inventor. As others have said a country doesn't invent anything people do. And this person thought of himself as scottish. Still I noticed you avoided my earlier point. Regardless of who was born in canda, at the time of the insuling invention, canda did not have it's own nationality. That would be like saying if something was invented in the jersey islands in the english channel today.. and then next year they became indepenent, that the invention was jersey. At the time of insuling canada was fully british Period.
pontypool said:
I dont think you got the gist of what I was saying, I said that if a country was going to claim Bell, Canada, Scotland, and the USA have some sort of 'claim', then I went on to say that people should make their own inventions if they wanted to be proud of themselves, meaning that they shouldnt rely on national pride to feel smart about themselves.
Canada was not 'fully british period', the country was essentially sovereign from 1867 on and slowly gained more autonomy until it was 100% independent in 1982.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Canada
Canadian Independence From the UK timeline:
- BNA Act July 1, 1867
- Canada joined the League of Nations in its own right 1919
- Statute of Westminster December 11, 1931
- Canada Act April 17, 1982
That's a strange statement. Have you counted all of the iventions that scotland made against those that england made? No. One is bound to be more inventive than the other.pontypool said:
Oh and you can add another thing to your welsh facts list: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/5235106.stm
I have another comment to make on this discussion of nationality of the inventor and location of the invention.
First some assumptions:
1) Humans from all parts of the world, being of the same species are statistically equal.
2) Some random people will be born with the extra smarts/creativity to become inventors, this could happen anywhere.
3) Environment has some impact on a persons development and studies.
3-a Environmental impact of birth country
3-b Environmental impact of country where most of the work is done (3a and 3b can be the same)
3-c Environmental impact of combined world community / world history
Based on assumptions (1 & 2) we could agree that a person who is capable of invention could be born anywhere.
Therefore, based on these assumptions alone we really have no business claiming any national pride over a certain inventor.
Now lets break down assumption number (3) environmental impact:
3-a education system, social values, elements of inspiration that occur before the inventor leaves his home country
3-b access to knowledge for study, social values, a need for the invention, contemporaries, economic base to fund studies, materials required, manpower, elements of inspiration that occur at the time of invention
3-c the past inventions and scientific study from people around the world, that brings all of humanity to our combined level of knowledge today
Based on these assumptions this is how I would rank the importance of the inventors random luck, the country the inventor was born in, and the country where the scientist does his work, 1 being the most important and 4 being the least important:
1) Random luck for the inventor to be born with the mental capacity for greatness
2) Combined level of world knowledge
3) country where the inventor does most of his or her work
4) country where the inventor was born
Therefore we can agree on 4 things:
1) The nations where an inventor or scientist is born, and works have less to do with their greatness then the dumb luck of the genetic dice roll.
2) The world and history lays claim to great people, not nations.
3) The place where the inventor does most of his work probably has more importance than where he or she was born.
4) The telephone as an invention belongs mostly to Alexander Graham Bell and the world as a whole, but in terms of national claims, if one can even argue it at all, they have more to due with the United States and Canada (even more so) and much less to do with Scotland or Britian.
First some assumptions:
1) Humans from all parts of the world, being of the same species are statistically equal.
2) Some random people will be born with the extra smarts/creativity to become inventors, this could happen anywhere.
3) Environment has some impact on a persons development and studies.
3-a Environmental impact of birth country
3-b Environmental impact of country where most of the work is done (3a and 3b can be the same)
3-c Environmental impact of combined world community / world history
Based on assumptions (1 & 2) we could agree that a person who is capable of invention could be born anywhere.
Therefore, based on these assumptions alone we really have no business claiming any national pride over a certain inventor.
Now lets break down assumption number (3) environmental impact:
3-a education system, social values, elements of inspiration that occur before the inventor leaves his home country
3-b access to knowledge for study, social values, a need for the invention, contemporaries, economic base to fund studies, materials required, manpower, elements of inspiration that occur at the time of invention
3-c the past inventions and scientific study from people around the world, that brings all of humanity to our combined level of knowledge today
Based on these assumptions this is how I would rank the importance of the inventors random luck, the country the inventor was born in, and the country where the scientist does his work, 1 being the most important and 4 being the least important:
1) Random luck for the inventor to be born with the mental capacity for greatness
2) Combined level of world knowledge
3) country where the inventor does most of his or her work
4) country where the inventor was born
Therefore we can agree on 4 things:
1) The nations where an inventor or scientist is born, and works have less to do with their greatness then the dumb luck of the genetic dice roll.
2) The world and history lays claim to great people, not nations.
3) The place where the inventor does most of his work probably has more importance than where he or she was born.
4) The telephone as an invention belongs mostly to Alexander Graham Bell and the world as a whole, but in terms of national claims, if one can even argue it at all, they have more to due with the United States and Canada (even more so) and much less to do with Scotland or Britian.
Aneurism: your post was such garbage,. I only sifted through it., and even then it made me cringe.
It's not where a person is born, but where a person is brought up, I am stunned how you tried to dismiss that fact as trivial by simply putting it as "where he was born" alexander was born and brought up in britain, in a british enviroment, with a british education system filling his head with knowledge. Albert einsten was no more intelligent than the average person, according to studies of his brain it's only an average size. it's education , or creativity (how you use your brain) that affects how you invent.
Also, I notice how you put his probablity of intelligence down to "dumb luck" now you must be really dumb to say something like that. Sure there is an element of randomness. but just like any other genes a baby can be born with. The chances of intelligence, creativity, or even physical strength is drawn from the gene pool provided by his parents.
Randomness comes second to the available genes the fetus is drawing from.
Alexanders parents was both british/scottish.
furthermore for anyone else thinking they can just poach an inventor who was born here and educated here. I am british, and its possible that i might migrate in the future, but in my heart I will always be british. This is my home and this is where I was brought up, it made me the person I am today and that will never change. According to bell he felt the same way. and I bet even you lot trying to steal inventors would feel the same way. So shut up and stop talking about a dead inventor who we should honour, by calling him a candian/ american inventor, even though he himself considered himself scottish.
and show some respect.
It's not where a person is born, but where a person is brought up, I am stunned how you tried to dismiss that fact as trivial by simply putting it as "where he was born" alexander was born and brought up in britain, in a british enviroment, with a british education system filling his head with knowledge. Albert einsten was no more intelligent than the average person, according to studies of his brain it's only an average size. it's education , or creativity (how you use your brain) that affects how you invent.
Also, I notice how you put his probablity of intelligence down to "dumb luck" now you must be really dumb to say something like that. Sure there is an element of randomness. but just like any other genes a baby can be born with. The chances of intelligence, creativity, or even physical strength is drawn from the gene pool provided by his parents.
Randomness comes second to the available genes the fetus is drawing from.
Alexanders parents was both british/scottish.
furthermore for anyone else thinking they can just poach an inventor who was born here and educated here. I am british, and its possible that i might migrate in the future, but in my heart I will always be british. This is my home and this is where I was brought up, it made me the person I am today and that will never change. According to bell he felt the same way. and I bet even you lot trying to steal inventors would feel the same way. So shut up and stop talking about a dead inventor who we should honour, by calling him a candian/ american inventor, even though he himself considered himself scottish.
and show some respect.
Xanikk999
History junkie
pontypool said:
Why dont you get over your jingostic pride and accept that british arent better at everything.
I dont know where you get your claims that 40% of inventions in the 18th centurty were british, but without evidence that sounds like pure garbage.
Learn to argue maturely and get a grip.
Xanikk999 said:
Because I choose not too.
http://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/BestifBrits.htm
40% are british.
All american had was good P.R
i was checking out that site and the british didn't discover north america that part of that sight isn't true Leif Ericson who was a viking he was the first european to land in North America up in Canada thats commonly known Americans don't beleive that columbus was the first person to discover america
(at least most that i know)
And with the airplane yeah the other guy died before he could prove that he could fly so you have to count him out because he never did fly before the Wrights and Frost there is contraversy all around that and there is a lack of documented proof that he did fly, unlike the Wrights. Stringfellow never actually flew a plane sure he built flying machines but he never flew one like the Wrights.
(at least most that i know)
And with the airplane yeah the other guy died before he could prove that he could fly so you have to count him out because he never did fly before the Wrights and Frost there is contraversy all around that and there is a lack of documented proof that he did fly, unlike the Wrights. Stringfellow never actually flew a plane sure he built flying machines but he never flew one like the Wrights.
You seemed to miss the whole point of his post which was that it's what nationality the inventor chooses to be that is the most important.Xanikk999 said:
You can't just try and claim inventors for your country when they never belonged to that country in the first place. It works both ways. If an american/canadian/whatever invented something in the UK, the invention would 'belong' to the inventor's nationality.
And the Wright brothers weren't the first to fly a plane: http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/pearse1.html
Well even if that is true the Wrights have the best documentation and it has gone down in the books that the Americans were first in flight. So until they change the history books thats what im sticking with. Its been contested but hasn't ever been changed.
Willowmound
Wordbug
Older than Dirt said:
Honestly!
All languages are a result of their history. English is a Germanic language with strong Latin (via French) influences.
To say it's not a real language... Ludicrous.
I_RA said:
Yeah because like I said. You have your head up your own ass. Like many americans who like to beleive their country hurled up the stars. Your happy to beleive your biased american history books and ignore other actual evidence because it suits yourself. And what was that in an earlier post? you said if there was proof of something you wouldn't argue, and yet here you are still beleving americans was the first to flight when they most definately was not. As for the british scientist who flew, once again you are wrong. He was witness flying and even in recent times they reconstructed his aircraft from his diagrams and it works.. not only that but it performed better than the wright brothers aircraft.
As stated before, america was not a pinoeer in almost as many things that they like to claim, they merely had better PR and pushed forward the concept of patents. Whereas in europe some great scientists invented things and didn't even bother to "patent" it until years later, it seems america is a much more financially motivated people .
British = first to invent something
Americans = first to prove and document they invented something and patent it to reep the financial rewards.
Please... what are you on?Aneurism said:The telephone... ...they have more to due with the United States and Canada (even more so) and much less to do with Scotland or Britian.
Xanikk, I think you missed who is jingoistic here
It doesn't sound that unrealistic to say that 40% of inventions in the 18th Century were probably British.
CF4L said:
Don't be so obtuse. If you document something good, it makes people more immediately aware of the discovery. on the other hand if you don't bother with the pr crap, people might not be made immediately aware of the discovery, but the evidence is still there and in the case of these early flights, witnessed by plenty of people too. its just not as publicised so it takes a while for the news to spread.
migthegreek said:Please... what are you on?
Xanikk, I think you missed who is jingoistic here
It doesn't sound that unrealistic to say that 40% of inventions in the 18th Century were probably British.
Jingoistic? hello! ...my whole argument shot down the notion of nationalism, plus my comment #4 was supposed to be funny hence the little google eyed smiley and smiley face. Also note my sig is a bit of ancient anti-nationalism.
PS By the way now that modern society has learned that racism, sexism. and religious discrimination is bad, the next big thing bad 'ism' to conquer on the horizon is 'nationalism'. (ie. discriminating against a human being based on the geographic location he or she was randomly born in)
Similar threads
