famous man made failures?

Question

hey guys, this may seem weird but for a speech i need to talk about famous man made failures such as the titanic. any really well known ones would be great, any ones set way way back in history is also very good, i cant really think of any myself.

Answer 1

1. The swaying bridge in Washington State that collapsed in a wind storm in the 1940s. I cannot recall which river it spanned but a quick search (on your part) will reveal the details.
2. The Kansas City hotel whose upper level balcony collapsed in about 1983 killing several people.
3. The Edsel automobile released by Ford Motor Company in 1958
4. Clear Pepsi which came out in about 1993
5. Sony Beta Max home videotape system which used a slightly smaller tape than standard VHS
6. The Laser Disc--NEVER did catch on and was soon replaced by the much more consumer friendly DVD format
7. 3-D movies. In spite of some successes they have NEVER been popular. If they were then ALL movies would be 3-D wouldn't they?
8. Smell-a-vision. A technique attempted in the early 1950s to inject scents into a theater during a movie to give the audience the impression that they were really there. The only movie released with this technology was "Behind the Great Wall"
9. The Corvair. This was the automobile that Ralph Nader wrote "Unsafe at ANY Speed" about. Rear-end collisions nearly always resulted in a fire.
10. The XFL, wrestling promoters VInce McMahan's attempt to mix professional wrestling with professional football. It only lasted one season and cost a LOT investors millions and millions of dollars.


Well, there are ten to get you started. Good luck.

Answer 2

May I suggest a more recent failure, or two:

1. The failure of the western world to react to the hitleresque mass slaughter of different ethnicities in Europe, the Balkans (ethnic cleansing to you sweet cheeks)

2. The failure to stop the destruction of the Budhhas in Afghanistan by the blokes down there...

I know that wasn't your angle but your teach would be impressed if you turned your thesis into political, rather than engineering failures.

Hope that helps.

Answer 3

Man-made failures?

George Bush. Border control. Nafta.

You don't normally hear about the failures, but the Ford Edsel is one.

Answer 4

Salton Sea in Southern California.

Answer 5

The Hindenburg

Answer 6

the thought guy could be destroyed yet no longer defeated from The old guy and the sea ought to be defined or paraphrased as: a guy could be killed, yet as long as he would not supply up he can not fairly be defeated. Santiago is going fishing on a regular basis even inspite of the indisputable fact that he's on a "dropping streak," as we ought to declare right this moment. He hasn't caught a fish for an extremely long term. He survives purely using fact the boy brings him bits of nutrients. yet he would not supply up. He keeps to fish conventional and keeps to objective. His "spirit" isn't broken. extra specifically, Santiago hooks the marlin and does poor conflict with it. he's an old guy yet he makes use of his capability and wits to defeat the fish, on the fee of super actual suffering. back, he would not supply up. Even after he defeats the marlin and then ought to combat the sharks, he keeps the conflict. His spirit continues to be stable. He would not get the fish abode contained in one in each and every of those shape he mandatory to make money for it--he fails, technically. yet a guy who keeps struggling with isn't a failure. it is Hemingway's cutting-edge view on the warrior. Hemingway is only too cutting-edge and worldly and smart to pull the old cliche of the warrior giving all of it he can and being unrealistically triumphant. The "stable" or "suitable" or "only" would not continuously win. The knight in shining armor would not continuously carry the day. yet Santiago can combat, whether. This makes him noble, like the marlin. And it makes him undefeated.

Answer 7

this isnt as WOAH as some of the other ones that other guys mentioned up there but it is VERY stupid.

the whole mad-cow thing.

come on! why would people want to feed cows cows. its like cannibal-ism except in cows. how hypocritical can we be!!!???


its not engineering or titanic-ish but it is a failure...

Answer 8

The South Sea Bubble was an economic phenomenon which saw intense speculation in company shares and brought ruin to many private investors.

In 1711, the earl of Oxford and others formed a company, known as The South Sea Company, to trade with Spanish colonies in South America. Britain was at war with Spain at the time but, it was hoped that soon the war would be over, and profitable trading could begin. The war ended in 1713, but the peace treaty was not favourable to British trade, only allowing one voyage a year to the colonies. The company made its first expedition in 1717 and made moderate profits, but the directors of the company had guaranteed a dividend of at least 6% per annum, and therefore the company was losing money.

The directors tried to maintain confidence in the company by asking King George I to become its governor, and then formulated an ingenious scheme to boost public confidence in their enterprise. They proposed the takeover of the National Debt. Holders of government stock would be offered shares in the South Sea Company in exchange for their bonds, and the South Sea Company would become the sole government creditor and banker. This scheme was readily accepted by Parliament and public confidence in the company was restored.

Investors believed that this company must be making vast profits in order to promote this scheme. In fact, the company was only exchanging its own paper shares for paper government bonds. The value of the company’s shares rocketed, and by the end of 1719, had reached a value of £1,000 for each £100 share. Many other companies sprang up in the wake of this seemingly lucrative enterprise. There was a company to ‘fix quicksilver and make it as soft and malleable as lead’. There was a company ‘to insure marriages against divorce’ and one ‘for the planting of mulberry trees and breeding silk-worms in Chelsea Park’. One company was formed ‘for carrying on an undertaking of great advantage but no one to know what it is’. The formation of companies to undertake fatuous schemes was not new at that time. The South Sea Company’s bankers were The Hollow Sword Blade Company, a corporation formed to produce hollow sword blades, but which had found that difficult or impossible, and had branched out into banking, issuing bank notes with designs of sword blades.

In an attempt to reduce the competition for speculators’ money, the South Sea Company issued writs against many of these bogus companies. The courts ruled that many of these companies were indeed operating illegally, and added that the South Sea Company itself was not above suspicion. Shares in the company dropped at once. The directors attempted to allay disquiet by raising dividends but investors asked where the money was coming from, and stock prices fell further. The company tried to issue more stock to raise money to keep the business going but prices fell again. In September 1720, the directors called a shareholders’ meeting to try to restore confidence but prices fell further. On 24th September 1720, The Hollow Sword Blade Company, closed down, leaving the company with no funds and no business. On 28th September 1720, the directors announced that the company was to cease trading.

A subsequent investigation revealed that the whole scheme had been operating illegally. The directors had misappropriated funds for their own purposes and had made vast profits on speculation. They had bribed the king’s mistresses to persuade him to accept the governorship of the company. Furthermore they had deliberately misled the public and the government as to the true value of the company. Parliament subsequently passed The Bubble Act which forbad the setting up of a company without a Royal Charter.

Answer 9

Nobody is perfect....everybody made failures, it's what matters that if they could overcome their failure

Answer 10

the Hindenburg disaster, is a good one. what were they thinking, using hydrogen to inflate a dirigible?!?