Good old Mr Crapper.Sgt.Kyle wrote:
toilet
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.
Good old Mr Crapper.Sgt.Kyle wrote:
toilet
Not for me, last time I took a dose I went into anaphylactic shock.Noobeater wrote:
penicillin.
Any religious book = the worst invention the world has ever seen.mikeyb118 wrote:
The Bible
I must concur. But that's my own opinion.KILLSWITCH wrote:
Any religious book = the worst invention the world has ever seen.mikeyb118 wrote:
The Bible
Extremely Lucrative thoughKILLSWITCH wrote:
Any religious book = the worst invention the world has ever seen.mikeyb118 wrote:
The Bible
True that.mikeyb118 wrote:
Extremely Lucrative thoughKILLSWITCH wrote:
Any religious book = the worst invention the world has ever seen.mikeyb118 wrote:
The Bible
That's kind of unfair. The Bible doesn't cause any problems. It's people using the Bible to push their agendas. For some people, religion helps them through life. I don't particularly understand the need, but if those who do need it don't abuse its existence, I'm okay with it.Smithereener wrote:
I must concur. But that's my own opinion.KILLSWITCH wrote:
Any religious book = the worst invention the world has ever seen.mikeyb118 wrote:
The Bible
I admire your logic with regards to Nuclear weapons, but I still think as time goes by they will become more easy to acquire and will ultimately lead to the demise of mankind.nukchebi0 wrote:
Nuclear weapons: These have prevented any major World War following 1945 because they have assured that no nation with them will attack another nation with them directly. All the nations with them are the ones who would initiate and be able to perpetuate a conventional global scale war, so the nuclear weapons have prevented this from occurring.
You're right that there are those that don't abuse it's existance. While the Bible does not can't directly cause trouble, the trouble that is indirectly caused by it is enough reason for me to believe it is one of the worst inventions. I've no qualms with some of the moral code that is outlined in it, but aren't there some passages in the old and new testament that preach or imply that certain killings in the name of the Lord is alright? I'm no expert on this, so correct me if I'm wrong. If the wackjobs that preach(ed) in the name of the Bible or any other holy book never existed, I would have different thoughts. I'm sorry that I'm sort of overlooking the ones that do no harm while believing in it, but the stuff that the idiots did do kind of kills it for me. Although some atheists aren't any better tbh.confused wrote:
That's kind of unfair. The Bible doesn't cause any problems. It's people using the Bible to push their agendas. For some people, religion helps them through life. I don't particularly understand the need, but if those who do need it don't abuse its existence, I'm okay with it.Smithereener wrote:
I must concur. But that's my own opinion.KILLSWITCH wrote:
Any religious book = the worst invention the world has ever seen.
Last edited by Smithereener (2007-07-07 23:13:13)
Last edited by HeadShotAK47 (2007-07-07 23:22:28)
I get the feeling some people are trying to turn this topic into something that should be found in the Debate and Serious Talk section. Leave the man alone. He didn't critique your votes.KILLSWITCH wrote:
True that.mikeyb118 wrote:
Extremely Lucrative thoughKILLSWITCH wrote:
Any religious book = the worst invention the world has ever seen.
This is Debate and Serious Talk, confronting people's opinions is what it is about. I still respect his opinions, doesn't mean I have to agree with them.Velker wrote:
I get the feeling some people are trying to turn this topic into something that should be found in the Debate and Serious Talk section. Leave the man alone. He didn't critique your votes.KILLSWITCH wrote:
True that.mikeyb118 wrote:
Extremely Lucrative though
My apologies. I am posting at 3:00 a.m. so I'm a little out of it. It just seems like something that should go in the Junk Drawer.KILLSWITCH wrote:
This is Debate and Serious Talk, confronting people's opinions is what it is about. I still respect his opinions, doesn't mean I have to agree with them.Velker wrote:
I get the feeling some people are trying to turn this topic into something that should be found in the Debate and Serious Talk section. Leave the man alone. He didn't critique your votes.KILLSWITCH wrote:
True that.
Last edited by spuddy1981 (2007-07-08 00:15:41)
I think the gun is probably one of the worst inventions seeing as to how it kills sooooo so many people, even if it is used for self defence, if there was no guns there could be a chance of there being no gangs, aka 10000% less violence, maybe even less drugs.imortal wrote:
The gun was the great equalizer. No longer could a lord ride their horse over their surfs. Before the gun, weapons of war took money and years of training to gain profinciancy, not to mention equipment. A man could be taught to use a gun in a day, and hit a target within a week.Smithereener wrote:
Just curious, but why gun powder and dynamite? I can understand the others. The only real benefit I see from the two as of now is blasting rocks to make way for railroads. But that's somewhat indirect.imortal wrote:
The wheel, the wedge, and the screw. Geometry. Gun powder. The printing press. Steel. Concrete. Dynamite.
Dynamite allowed us to form the earth to our wishes; to tame the very ground we tread upon. The Panama canal. The Suez canal. Any tunnel or modern dam you can practically name. New waterways, highways; methods of transportation rely on dynamite, and our civilization relies on transportation. It also allowed these to be created using less manpower. Less manpower means people are freed up to do other things.
He is married with children dude. . . .lolZilla wrote:
thats cuz you dont get any of the real thing!ATG wrote:
My vote.
Yeah. Instead, we had the Cold War and its abhorrent duck'n'cover drills.KILLSWITCH wrote:
I admire your logic with regards to Nuclear weapons, but I still think as time goes by they will become more easy to acquire and will ultimately lead to the demise of mankind.nukchebi0 wrote:
Nuclear weapons: These have prevented any major World War following 1945 because they have assured that no nation with them will attack another nation with them directly. All the nations with them are the ones who would initiate and be able to perpetuate a conventional global scale war, so the nuclear weapons have prevented this from occurring.