Bicycle chosen as best invention

[Cycle America]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4513929.stm
Last Updated: Thursday, 5 May, 2005, 07:10 GMT 08:10 UK 

Bicycle chosen as best invention

The humble bicycle has won a UK national survey of people's favourite
inventions.

Listeners to BBC Radio 4's You and Yours programme were invited to vote
in an online poll looking at the most significant innovations since 1800.

It was an easy victory for the bicycle which won more than half of the
vote.

The transistor came second with 8% of the vote, and the electro-magnetic
induction ring - the means to harness electricity - came third.

Interplanetary travel

Despite their ubiquity, computers gained just 6% of the vote and the
internet trailed behind with only 4% of all votes cast. There were more
than 4,500 votes cast in total.

People chose the bicycle for its simplicity of design, universal use,
and because it is an ecologically sound means of transport.

The survey also asked participants which innovation they would most like
to disinvent.

GM foods came top of this poll with 26% of the vote, followed by nuclear
power with 19%.

By contrast, the technology most would like to see invented was an Aids
vaccine.

Alas, plans to ship long-suffering commuters to distant planets may need
to be put on hold with only 15% voting for an interplanetary commuting
transport system.

Half voted water treatment and supply systems as the technology to bring
most benefit to society.

Another 23% thought that vaccinations deserved the honour.

Each of the technologies were nominated by a different expert, including
writer Sir Arthur C Clarke, cloning expert Professor Ian Wilmut, and
Professor Heinz Wolff.

Prof Wolff's praise of the bicycle held the most sway with voters which
will come as a disappointment to Lord Alec Broers, this year's Reith
lecturer.

His series of lectures - Triumph of Technology - prompted the vote.

In the first of his talks, he expressed surprise at the results of a
similar survey.

It too ranked the bicycle above scientific breakthroughs such as
electricity generation, the jet engine, the discovery of DNA and the
invention of vaccinations.


Bicycle - 59%
Transistor - 8%
Electro-magnetic induction ring - 8%
Computer - 6%
Germ theory of infection - 5%
Radio - 5%
Internet - 4%
Internal combustion engine - 3%
Nuclear power - 1%
Communications satellite - 1%

--
54% of New York City households do not own cars

M A R T I N K R I E G : "Awake Again" Author
http://www.bikeroute.com/AwakeAgain
Bent Since '83, Car Free Since '89, '79 & '86 TransAms        
Coma, Paralysis, Clinical Death Survivor 
Can You Change it with Love? 
N A T I O N A L B I C Y C L E G R E E N W A Y

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Cycle America" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4513929.stm
> Last Updated: Thursday, 5 May, 2005, 07:10 GMT 08:10 UK
>
> Bicycle chosen as best invention
>
> The humble bicycle has won a UK national survey of people's favourite
> inventions.
>
> Listeners to BBC Radio 4's You and Yours programme were invited to vote
> in an online poll looking at the most significant innovations since 1800.
>
> It was an easy victory for the bicycle which won more than half of the
> vote.
[...]

It has been said that the bicycle was the last invention of mankind that the
common man can fully understand and appreciate just by looking at it.

When I got my first bicycle some 30 years ago I determined that I was going
to do my own repairs and maintenance even if it killed me. But it did not
kill me at all. It was interesting and fun to come to a full understanding
of the bicycle by such a means.

The bicycle was a humble invention, but a very great one nonetheless. Kids
like them and old folks like them. If it weren't for the invention of the
horseless carriage, all of mankind would like them too.

To be able to travel under your own power faster than on foot is a blooming
miracle.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

 

[William McHale]

Edward Dolan <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Cycle America" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4513929.stm
>> Last Updated: Thursday, 5 May, 2005, 07:10 GMT 08:10 UK
>>
>> Bicycle chosen as best invention
>>
>> The humble bicycle has won a UK national survey of people's favourite
>> inventions.
>>
>> Listeners to BBC Radio 4's You and Yours programme were invited to vote
>> in an online poll looking at the most significant innovations since 1800.
>>
>> It was an easy victory for the bicycle which won more than half of the
>> vote.
> [...]

> It has been said that the bicycle was the last invention of mankind that the
> common man can fully understand and appreciate just by looking at it.

> When I got my first bicycle some 30 years ago I determined that I was going
> to do my own repairs and maintenance even if it killed me. But it did not
> kill me at all. It was interesting and fun to come to a full understanding
> of the bicycle by such a means.

> The bicycle was a humble invention, but a very great one nonetheless. Kids
> like them and old folks like them. If it weren't for the invention of the
> horseless carriage, all of mankind would like them too.

> To be able to travel under your own power faster than on foot is a blooming
> miracle.

Not only that but for a variety of purposes it was essentially faster than
using a horse or horse and carriage as well (granted a horse can run faster
than people can go on the bicycle but there is a fair bit of time and effort
involved with getting a horse ready to ride.).

--
Bill

 

[Tony Belding]

On 2005-05-11 10:20:50 -0500, Cycle America <[email protected]> said:

> The survey also asked participants which innovation they would most
> like to disinvent.
>
> GM foods came top of this poll with 26% of the vote, followed by
> nuclear power with 19%.

That's a bit depressing, really. GM foods and nuclear power both have
great promise and can help solve some of the world's problems.

I think nuclear power is going to be critical in the near future, as
worldwide energy demand outstrips production of gas and oil. The only
readily available, off-the-shelf technologies we have for making up the
difference are nuclear and coal -- and given that choice, nuclear is
far safer and cleaner. (Any nuclear plant would be shut down and a
state of emergency declared if it threw as much radioactive material
into the air as a typical coal-fired plant does. And that's to say
nothing of all the other nasty stuff they release.)

GM foods are peculiar, because Europe and Britain seem to have strongly
turned against them -- for reasons that remain unclear to me -- while
the whole issue has never made much impact into the public
consciousness here. Farmers have tinkered with their crops genetically
for the last 5000 years, so I don't see any reason for panic just
because a more efficient method of tinkering has come long. Also, I
think GM is great if it allows cutting down the use of pesticides on
crops. Unfortunately, many of the agro-chem companies are now the same
ones purveying GM crops. Instead of making pest-resistant crops, they
are making herbicide-resistant crops so they can sell more weed killer
to farmers. That's an example of bad behavior, not bad technology.

Getting back to the subject of bicycles, I wonder how this survey would
play out in different geographical regions?

I live in Texas, and Texans love their SUVs and pickup trucks. I grew
up on a cattle ranch way out in the middle of nowhere, and a bike was
pretty much useless. Even after we moved to the outskirts of town, I
never changed my habits or attitudes for many years -- I still assumed
the 1-mile distance from my house to town was insurmountable without a
combustion engine. Despite all the urbanization that has taken place,
a lot of Texans still think like cowboys at heart, and they want a 4WD
pickup truck so they can haul fence posts and rolls of barbed wire
around the ol' homestead.

On the other hand. . . We have Lance Armstrong, who has almost
single-handedly made it possible for a Texan to ride a bike without
being laughed at by his neighbors. Times change even here.

--
Tony Belding, Hamilton Texas

 

[Greg Dunn]

It sure gets my vote. In addition to my two recumbents, I have a couple of
uprights that I use as commuting bikes. As a bang-for-the-buck expenditure,
it's hard to come up with anything to compete with a decent garage sale
bicycle. I mean, if you had nothing in the bank and made $100 a month,
there are few things that could improve your lot more than a $10 bike from a
garage sale.

Greg Dunn





"Cycle America" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4513929.stm
> Last Updated: Thursday, 5 May, 2005, 07:10 GMT 08:10 UK
>
> Bicycle chosen as best invention
>
> The humble bicycle has won a UK national survey of people's favourite
> inventions.
>
> Listeners to BBC Radio 4's You and Yours programme were invited to vote
> in an online poll looking at the most significant innovations since 1800.
>
> It was an easy victory for the bicycle which won more than half of the
> vote.
>
> The transistor came second with 8% of the vote, and the electro-magnetic
> induction ring - the means to harness electricity - came third.
>
> Interplanetary travel
>
> Despite their ubiquity, computers gained just 6% of the vote and the
> internet trailed behind with only 4% of all votes cast. There were more
> than 4,500 votes cast in total.
>
> People chose the bicycle for its simplicity of design, universal use,
> and because it is an ecologically sound means of transport.
>
> The survey also asked participants which innovation they would most like
> to disinvent.
>
> GM foods came top of this poll with 26% of the vote, followed by nuclear
> power with 19%.
>
> By contrast, the technology most would like to see invented was an Aids
> vaccine.
>
> Alas, plans to ship long-suffering commuters to distant planets may need
> to be put on hold with only 15% voting for an interplanetary commuting
> transport system.
>
> Half voted water treatment and supply systems as the technology to bring
> most benefit to society.
>
> Another 23% thought that vaccinations deserved the honour.
>
> Each of the technologies were nominated by a different expert, including
> writer Sir Arthur C Clarke, cloning expert Professor Ian Wilmut, and
> Professor Heinz Wolff.
>
> Prof Wolff's praise of the bicycle held the most sway with voters which
> will come as a disappointment to Lord Alec Broers, this year's Reith
> lecturer.
>
> His series of lectures - Triumph of Technology - prompted the vote.
>
> In the first of his talks, he expressed surprise at the results of a
> similar survey.
>
> It too ranked the bicycle above scientific breakthroughs such as
> electricity generation, the jet engine, the discovery of DNA and the
> invention of vaccinations.
>
>
> Bicycle - 59%
> Transistor - 8%
> Electro-magnetic induction ring - 8%
> Computer - 6%
> Germ theory of infection - 5%
> Radio - 5%
> Internet - 4%
> Internal combustion engine - 3%
> Nuclear power - 1%
> Communications satellite - 1%
>
> --
> 54% of New York City households do not own cars
>
> M A R T I N K R I E G : "Awake Again" Author
> http://www.bikeroute.com/AwakeAgain
> Bent Since '83, Car Free Since '89, '79 & '86 TransAms
> Coma, Paralysis, Clinical Death Survivor
> Can You Change it with Love?
> N A T I O N A L B I C Y C L E G R E E N W A Y

 

[Greg Dunn]

> I think nuclear power is going to be critical in the near future, as
> worldwide energy demand outstrips production of gas and oil. The only
> readily available, off-the-shelf technologies we have for making up the
> difference are nuclear and coal -- and given that choice, nuclear is far
> safer and cleaner. (Any nuclear plant would be shut down and a

At first glance, nuclear power is indeed a very attractive energy production
option, especially with the breeder reactor, where you get more fissionable
material out than you put in. But there are two big problems with nuclear
power that haven't been solved in half a century of trying: (1) finding a
safe place for the radioactive wastes, and a safe way to get them from the
power plants to the disposal sites; and (2) keeping radioactive material out
of the hands of people who will use its tremendous destructive power to
bully and terrorize others. The more nuclear power has been used to solve
energy needs, the greater both problems have become. When you consider all
factors, nuclear power turns out to be the most costly energy technology
ever conceived, by a wide margin.

> I live in Texas, and Texans love their SUVs and pickup trucks.

Californians love them, too. And sure, they're fun. But so, apparently, is
sniffing glue.

Greg Dunn
BSME, MSME, University of Texas at Austin
(and a former student of Dale Klein, appointed by George W. Bush to the
position of Assistant Secretary for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological
Defense Programs Defense Department)


"Tony Belding" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:2005051409430916807%zobeid@techiecom...
> On 2005-05-11 10:20:50 -0500, Cycle America <[email protected]> said:
>
>> The survey also asked participants which innovation they would most like
>> to disinvent.
>>
>> GM foods came top of this poll with 26% of the vote, followed by nuclear
>> power with 19%.
>
> That's a bit depressing, really. GM foods and nuclear power both have
> great promise and can help solve some of the world's problems.
>
> I think nuclear power is going to be critical in the near future, as
> worldwide energy demand outstrips production of gas and oil. The only
> readily available, off-the-shelf technologies we have for making up the
> difference are nuclear and coal -- and given that choice, nuclear is far
> safer and cleaner. (Any nuclear plant would be shut down and a state of
> emergency declared if it threw as much radioactive material into the air
> as a typical coal-fired plant does. And that's to say nothing of all the
> other nasty stuff they release.)
>
> GM foods are peculiar, because Europe and Britain seem to have strongly
> turned against them -- for reasons that remain unclear to me -- while the
> whole issue has never made much impact into the public consciousness here.
> Farmers have tinkered with their crops genetically for the last 5000
> years, so I don't see any reason for panic just because a more efficient
> method of tinkering has come long. Also, I think GM is great if it allows
> cutting down the use of pesticides on crops. Unfortunately, many of the
> agro-chem companies are now the same ones purveying GM crops. Instead of
> making pest-resistant crops, they are making herbicide-resistant crops so
> they can sell more weed killer to farmers. That's an example of bad
> behavior, not bad technology.
>
> Getting back to the subject of bicycles, I wonder how this survey would
> play out in different geographical regions?
>
> I live in Texas, and Texans love their SUVs and pickup trucks. I grew up
> on a cattle ranch way out in the middle of nowhere, and a bike was pretty
> much useless. Even after we moved to the outskirts of town, I never
> changed my habits or attitudes for many years -- I still assumed the
> 1-mile distance from my house to town was insurmountable without a
> combustion engine. Despite all the urbanization that has taken place, a
> lot of Texans still think like cowboys at heart, and they want a 4WD
> pickup truck so they can haul fence posts and rolls of barbed wire around
> the ol' homestead.
>
> On the other hand. . . We have Lance Armstrong, who has almost
> single-handedly made it possible for a Texan to ride a bike without being
> laughed at by his neighbors. Times change even here.
>
> --
> Tony Belding, Hamilton Texas
>

 

[William McHale]

LioNiNoiL_a t_Y a h 0 0_d 0 t_c 0 m <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tony Belding wrote:

>>> GM foods came top of this poll with 26% of the vote, followed
>>> by nuclear power with 19%.
>>
>> That's a bit depressing, really. GM foods and nuclear power
>> both have great promise and can help solve some of the world's
>> problems.

> I've been hearing about that "great promise" of nuclear power since I
> was a schoolboy in the early Fifties, and what's depressing to me is the
> long history of mismanagement and misrepresentation in the nuclear
> military-industrial complex, which has done just about nothing to help
> solve some of the world's problems, while adding greatly to them in
> terms of hazard, debt, abuse, and waste.

Well actually in some countries Nuclear reactors provide a significant
percentage of the energy used in those countries. Further in the near
term it appears that if we want to get serious about reducing green-house
emmisions we will have little choice but to turn to some form of nuclear
power. In the near term the alternatives are just not capable of providing
more than a fraction of the energy we need.

There is an alternative to the normal fission reactor that hasn't got much
press yet but it holds great promise. The Thorium Energy Pump is essentially
a type of breeder reactor that turns relatively common Thorium into
Uranium 233 which when fissioned produces byproducts with much smaller half
lives than are produced by U235 or Plutonium. Granted we are still talkin
about hundreds of years but at least there is a reasonable chance of containing
it until it is safe.

>> Farmers have tinkered with their crops genetically for the
>> last 5000 years, so I don't see any reason for panic just
>> because a more efficient method of tinkering has come long.

> GM is only "more efficient" in terms of profit-making for agribusiness,
> and has virtually nothing in common with the selection process practiced
> by farmers. Dismissing their concerns, and the legitimate concerns of
> others as "panic" is indefensible.

There are legitimate concerns regarding Geneticly modified foods, but there is
also alot of panic. There are definitely those who are going to reject GM
foods regardless of the science that might show it to be as safe as the food
we currently eat (especially considering that such food is often laced with
chemicls).


--
Bill

 

[LioNiNoiL_a t_Y a h 0 0_d 0 t_c 0 m]

William McHale wrote:

> if we want to get serious about reducing green-house emmisions
> we will have little choice but to turn to some form of nuclear
> power. In the near term the alternatives are just not capable
> of providing more than a fraction of the energy we need.

If the world population continues to increase at the rate of a billion
per decade, and the per-capita demand [not "need"] for electricity and
motor fuel continues to increase as its present rate, there is no
foreseeable technology that can be scaled up quickly enough to fill that
demand by the time greenhouse gases become a tangible threat. The
problem cannot be solved by increasing production while not reducing
demand; and the bicycle is one very beneficial way of reducing that demand.

> There are definitely those who are going to reject GM foods
> regardless of the science that might show it to be as safe

After the repeated failures of the fake corporate "science" showing
aspartame, Vioxx, Bextra, and a host of other poisons to be "safe" by
the FDA (Fraud and Drug Administration), who can blame them? Again, the
bicycle is one very beneficial way to reduce the need for FDA-approved
poison pills, by relieving stress and tension while improving overall
health and fitness.

Comparing the malevolent potential of nukes and Frankenfood with the
beneficial effects of the bicycle, there can be no doubt the bicycle is
a much nobler invention by far.

--
"Bicycling is a healthy and manly pursuit with much
to recommend it, and, unlike other foolish crazes,
it has not died out." -- The Daily Telegraph (1877)

 

[Steve McDonald]

If the survey had been taken only among women, the battery-powered
vibrator would have won.

Steve McDonald

 

[Tony Belding]

On 2005-05-18 14:11:58 -0500, LioNiNoiL_a t_Y a h 0 0_d 0 t_c 0 m
<[email protected]> said:

> If the world population continues to increase at the rate of a billion
> per decade,

Not going to happen -- or at least, not indefinitely. The U.N.
estimates that world population will peak around 9 billion (which is
admittedly a large and scary number) and then begin gradually
decreasing. Industrialized nations tend to have fewer children than
agricultural nations. As more of the world industrializes, the world
population should stabilize. You can look to the graying demographics
of Europe and Japan for a good example of where the world is heading
over the long haul.

It's no mystery, it's simple economics. If you live in an urban,
industrial setting, your kids are usually an economic burden on you all
the way through their college years. You love 'em, but darn it,
they're expensive. By comparison, if you live on a small,
low-technology farm, your kids can start doing chores around the place
when they are 5 or 6. They're probably the cheapest labor you're gonna
find.

--
Tony Belding, Hamilton Texas