Technology we'd have today...?

Question

"We would be 1,500 years ahead if it hadn't been for the church dragging science back by its coattails and burning our best minds at the stake." - Catherine Fahringer

Imagine the amazing technologies we'd have today if it weren't for religion, we'd probably have cures for most diseases known to man...

What do you think?

Answer 1

Absolutely, religion has held back a ton of science

The problem is they still haven't learned, they still do the same thing today - minus the burnings

Answer 2

Well, let's consider that while basic missiles and cruise missiles, along with basic guided weapons, did appear during WWII, the advances made since then make what was quite advanced for their time quite primitive. Then, of course there are the advances in aircraft. A B-52 flies higher than a B-17 did and the B-17 was the highest flying heavy bomber in the European theater (the B-17G had a ceiling of 35,600 ft, the B-52G's ceiling is over 10,000 feet higher at 47,000 ft). And the B-2 stealth bomber has a ceiling that's three thousand feet higher than the B-52G. And then there are the VTOL aircraft like the Harrier and of course all kinds of helicopters. Not to mention modern attack and fighter jets and unmanned drones. Now consider the invasion begins with the launch of cruise missiles and laser guided smart bombs instead the carpet bombing and naval bombardment. In fact there isn't even a paratrooper drop the night before. These more precise weapons take out all the seen German defenses on the beaches with pin point accuracy, allowing troops to safely land on the beaches without any opposition. Meanwhile, helicopters and V-22 Ospreys (and any similar aircraft), fly airborne and special forces troops in ahead of the main body while UAVs preform recon and if capable of doing so take out some of the Germans artillery positions that may have been camoflaged enough to be missed by the bombardment phase (not to mention the fact that some positions were moved from where Allied recon had placed them, making the bombardment of the positions useless during the actual invasion). Any heavy resistance not eliminated by the drones can then have helios like the Apache called in as close air support to eliminate it fairly effortlessly. On the ground, the airborne and special forces modern combat rifles, especially those rifles that can be modular and feature two or more fire modes, quickly give them the definitive edge, moping up any remaining German resistance. Body armor would have given these troops a better chance of surviving German rifle fire (though grenades would still have been just as deadly) Meanwhile, once the tanks are finally dispatched their eliminated long before they become a threat as A-10s and any other aircraft that can serve as tank busters (this includes helios) make mincemeat out of them. Though if it's decided not to let the aircraft handle the German tanks, then the Panzers and the Tigers have to face the likes of tanks such as the Abrams and the Challenger 2 which so dominate the German tanks that it becomes a joke they were even sent to Normandy at all. By the time the tanks are even sent the Allies are past having a foot hold and have long since broken out. All told the main invasion would probably have taken a handful of hours with the elimination of the German tanks being seen as something seperate from the invasion (rather than occuring late in the invasion as actually occured, they were no threat to the initial stages of the invasion, but could have later pushed the invasion back into the sea). German casualties would have been higher than the Allied casualties. In actuality, German casualties were estimated at between 4,000 and 9,000 men while the combined estimates for Canadian, UK, and US casualties was 10,000 men. That's a difference of between 1,000 and 6,000 men. In this situation, German casualties might go up, but Allied casualties could well drop to between 2,000 and 3,000 men, if not lower.

Answer 3

This is debatable, but only by a small fraction.

Even with 500 extra years of scientific research, we'd be very far ahead.

With 1500 years, I do believe we would have been able to do quite a few things such as:
-Unlock new parts of our brain, since we only use a small fraction at the moment.
-We'd most CERTAINLY be on mars if not even out of the solar system creating colonies in asteroid belts or on other planets. We have only found a fraction of the planets orbiting suns in the galaxy, and some of them that we could find could be almost inhabitable.
-As you said, we'd probably have cures for alot of diseases.
-We might have devloped a different societial structure, eliminating things such as overcrowding and poverty in large cities.

The possiblities are so many, it makes me sad to think that I won't be around to see them all fulfilled.

But I am considering cryogenically freezing myself in about 70 years and then if the world isn't completely phucked over, get someone to take me out of hibernation in about a thousand years.

That'd be one helluva trip don'tcha say?

Answer 4

This all goes back to ancient Greek times. Society had a choice, to follow the meta-physical ideologies of Aristotle, or the physical sciences of Plato. Well, we chose the former. It is said that if we were to go along with Plato, then cars, modern medicine, and technology could have come to being around jesus' time.

I don't buy it... but it is an interesting thought.

Answer 5

It could be, I know that the Catholic church banned many mathematical, scientifical, and philosophical writings a while ago. However, I don't think man would be free of death of disease. There are always new viruses and diseases that are coming about, a good example is cancer.

Answer 6

I think we would have pushed global warming earlier with all that technology, and might not even be here today. It's kinda like on the old Star Trek shows, if they gave advanced technology to races not yet emotionally or mentally able to deal with those technologies, they could basically end up wiping themselves off their planets. We humans aren't as advanced as we believe ourselves to be. Just look at what we've done so far to our planet with technology we already have.

Answer 7

The tenet is debatable. Even during the darkest days of the Middle Ages, some learning was taking place.

Answer 8

And technology as well created most of the diseases. Known to man? Man is the only creature that ever gets sick. Ever heard of a wild animal having the flu, or even braking a bone? Never. Man is retarded. It ain't about curing the disease, it's about it never existing.

Answer 9

Don't worry, you won't have much longer to enjoy all the "knowledge" you've built up anyway. Things have begun to move in a way that you won't be able to understand until it is upon you, and even then some will not understand.

Answer 10

And if the black plauge hadn't killed 1/3rd of Europe
And the Civil War hadn't killed so many young men
And if the Nazis hadn't killed all those Jews
Who knows how much further our scientific knowledge would have progressed.

Maybe instead of blaming the church, you should take a look at humanity.