pull down to refresh

147 sats \ 11 replies \ @tomlaies 7 Jun \ on: What has been the worst or most harmful scientific discovery of all time? science
Dynamite: invented for mining used in war.
Maybe go further back and say gunpowder? It's probably hard to beat the invention of gunpowder in terms of harmfulness.
write
preview
37 sats \ 6 replies \ @petertodd 7 Jun
Without dynamite or similar explosives the mines that provided the minerals necessary for you to digitally write that comment probably would never have existed.
reply
31 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 7 Jun
Dynamite 🧨 was necessary for building the Panama Canal and Hoover Dam
reply
3 sats \ 2 replies \ @tomlaies 8 Jun
That's true but I thought we were talking about how harmful inventions were, not what their net weighted impact after comparing positives and negatives were
reply
29 sats \ 1 reply \ @petertodd 8 Jun
Thing is, if positives aren't included at all, the discovery of fire and invention of language are probably it: the most global harm ever came from them.
reply
13 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies 8 Jun
That's a good point to go further back but I'd argue that the difference if that the harm from gunpowder is more direct and more tangible
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Taft OP 7 Jun
Oh, if you put that way, dynamite is probably the most dangerous discovery.
reply
114 sats \ 0 replies \ @petertodd 7 Jun
Nah, fire was! Or language...
reply
13 sats \ 1 reply \ @Taft OP 7 Jun
It's probably hard to beat the invention of gunpowder in terms of harmfulness.
I think nuclear and biological weapons beat gunpowder.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies 8 Jun
Not that many people have died from those yet. Horrible things, true that. But in the grand scheme of things ... maybe not that big.
reply
223 sats \ 0 replies \ @travis 8 Jun
Gunpowder is an interesting one. Another perspective is that gunpowder empowers individuals or minorities. It can be an equalizer or amplifier of force usually unattainable. For example, a small and fragile person can have a chance to defend themself with a firearm, where as prior to firearms they would have to rely on others.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 7 Jun
Alfred Nobel
reply