What's new
By:

Inventions gone horribly wrong

PearlWatson

PearlWatson

Well-Known Member
I find the minds of genius inventors rather interesting.

In 1915, Orville (his brother Wilbur had passed away by then) predicted aerial reconnaissance would make war "... too expensive, too slow, too difficult, too long drawn out" for anyone to keep doing it. After the U.S. entered WWI, Orville confidently wrote that the nation with the most airborne scouts, "will win the war and put an end to war."

Put an end to war! Awesome! Hey, how did that turn out?
Click to expand...

6 geniuses who saw their inventions go terribly wrong
 
some things turn out OK.

Chocolate.

Probably nothing else would get a more positive public opinion, something like 101% including my dog who steals my chocolates, downs them, and acts like "what do you expect, dude?". And no, he doesn't die according to the urban legend that chocolate is poison for dogs. Obviously invented by a jealous spouse who shared some chocolate with the dog instead of him.
 
Millsapa said:
I find the minds of genius inventors rather interesting.



6 geniuses who saw their inventions go terribly wrong
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are getting at here. Are you trying to say that if you invent something and people use it in ways you didn't foresee, then you are a failure? Or if you invent something that changes everyone's lives, but some people don't like how it is used, then you are a failure? Or if you try to predict that something you invent might have a positive effect on society, but others use it in a way that is negative, so your prediction is wrong, then you are a failure?

This article is a big fail as far as I am concerned. The LP record is a failure because the guy writing the article doesn't like the music some people put on it?
 
babe said:
some things turn out OK.

Chocolate.

Probably nothing else would get a more positive public opinion, something like 101% including my dog who steals my chocolates, downs them, and acts like "what do you expect, dude?". And no, he doesn't die according to the urban legend that chocolate is poison for dogs. Obviously invented by a jealous spouse who shared some chocolate with the dog instead of him.
Click to expand...

"The problem, according to veterinary experts, is that eating a speck of chocolate leads a dog to crave more. It can mean that your dog will jump at a opportunity to get any type of chocolate, not knowing that certain chocolates are more lethal than other types. Larger amounts of chocolate, particularly of the most toxic type, can bring about epileptic seizures in some dogs, and in all dogs, can kill.

Poisoning of dogs by chocolate is not as uncommon as you might think.

Why is Chocolate Lethal?
Chocolate contains theobromine. A naturally occurring stimulant found in the cocoa bean, theobromine increases urination and affects the central nervous system as well as heart muscle. While amounts vary by type of chocolate, it's the theobromine that is poisonous to dogs.

Symptoms of Chocolate Dog Ingestion and Poisoning
You can recognize that your dog has eaten a toxic dose of chocolate from the symptoms. Within the first few hours, the evidence includes vomiting, diarrhea or hyperactivity. As time passes and there's increased absorption of the toxic substance, you'll see an increase in the dog's heart rate, which can cause arrhythmia, restlessness, hyperactivity, muscle twitching, increased urination or excessive panting.

This can lead to hyperthermia, muscle tremors, seizures, coma and even death."

https://www.dogownersdigest.com/news/library/chocolate-dog-poisoning.shtml

Luckily the lethal dose is relatively high.

Next time try the internet, it has lots of answers. Even snopes has info on it, if you are into urban legends:

https://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/cocoamulch.asp

(about halfway down it talks about the dangers of theobromine to dogs and other pets)

/thread derail
 
LogGrad98 said:
Not sure what you are getting at here. Are you trying to say that if you invent something and people use it in ways you didn't foresee, then you are a failure? Or if you invent something that changes everyone's lives, but some people don't like how it is used, then you are a failure? Or if you try to predict that something you invent might have a positive effect on society, but others use it in a way that is negative, so your prediction is wrong, then you are a failure?

This article is a big fail as far as I am concerned. The LP record is a failure because the guy writing the article doesn't like the music some people put on it?
Click to expand...

I wasn't making any judgements. I think it is pretty interesting to see the contrast between the expectations they had for their inventions and the actual uses and consequences of their inventions.
Like Alfred nobody wants to be blamed when their "creations" are used nefariously.

The LP record thing is an irony. He invented the record because the skipping in the older version annoyed him. Now DJ's purposely skip LP records.
 
Millsapa said:
I wasn't making any judgements. I think it is pretty interesting to see the contrast between the expectations they had for their inventions and the actual uses and consequences of their inventions.
Like Alfred nobody wants to be blamed when their "creations" are used nefariously.

The LP record thing is an irony. He invented the record because the skipping in the older version annoyed him. Now DJ's purposely skip LP records.
Click to expand...

Ah yes. From that angle it is interesting. I still think the authors are taking some pretty broad lattitude in their assessment of what some of the inventors wanted/expected with their inventions, but it is interesting.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Ah yes. From that angle it is interesting. I still think the authors are taking some pretty broad lattitude in their assessment of what some of the inventors wanted/expected with their inventions, but it is interesting.
Click to expand...

Yes they purposely do so because cracked.com is a humor site.

But Orville really said this:

"the aeroplane has made war so terrible that I do not believe any country will again care to start a war,"

I think it was pretty funny how Orville kept insisting that his invention would end all wars...he just had different reasons why after each evolution of his invention.
 
LogGrad98 said:
"The problem, according to veterinary experts, is that eating a speck of chocolate leads a dog to crave more. It can mean that your dog will jump at a opportunity to get any type of chocolate, not knowing that certain chocolates are more lethal than other types. Larger amounts of chocolate, particularly of the most toxic type, can bring about epileptic seizures in some dogs, and in all dogs, can kill.

Poisoning of dogs by chocolate is not as uncommon as you might think.

Why is Chocolate Lethal?
Chocolate contains theobromine. A naturally occurring stimulant found in the cocoa bean, theobromine increases urination and affects the central nervous system as well as heart muscle. While amounts vary by type of chocolate, it's the theobromine that is poisonous to dogs.

Symptoms of Chocolate Dog Ingestion and Poisoning
You can recognize that your dog has eaten a toxic dose of chocolate from the symptoms. Within the first few hours, the evidence includes vomiting, diarrhea or hyperactivity. As time passes and there's increased absorption of the toxic substance, you'll see an increase in the dog's heart rate, which can cause arrhythmia, restlessness, hyperactivity, muscle twitching, increased urination or excessive panting.

This can lead to hyperthermia, muscle tremors, seizures, coma and even death."

https://www.dogownersdigest.com/news/library/chocolate-dog-poisoning.shtml

Luckily the lethal dose is relatively high.

Next time try the internet, it has lots of answers. Even snopes has info on it, if you are into urban legends:

https://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/cocoamulch.asp

(about halfway down it talks about the dangers of theobromine to dogs and other pets)

/thread derail
Click to expand...

Good point about the derail. Chocolate was known as the food of the Gods. That's what theobromine means. At least according to the info on the tour of the Chocolate Factory in Henderson, NV. Adding milk, sweeteners is what makes it an actual invention by man. It was just a crude drink when Europeans first became aware of it.

I studied the prostaglandin synthetase inhibitors on the graduate level. Tell me when it was ever evaluated in a scientific way for the canine species. It's been years since I combed the index medicus. I'd be surprised if our metabolism is any different from the dogs. Except I do agree that a dog can ingest much more chocolate than I can, and in literally one gulp, and they have less kg mass for the dosage, and much more efficient digestive systems.

Maybe my dog is just lucky chocolate is not left sitting around in my house. . . . it is consumed before it lands. . . . . and no I don't throw chocolate to my snarfer.

So to try to get back on topic a bit, how about this: maybe I didn't think it through the first time. Maybe letting couch potatos imbibe, in concentrated and sugared form, the Food of Gods, is really going way, waaaaay, wrong. Should we start a new cult with a high priest (me) who alone is allowed to indulge in this sacramental offering?

Would this end all wars??? or start a really big one????

Originally, it was the war parties and chiefs who alone were permitted to drink the crude herbal mash/drink, so this would bring us full circle.
 
babe said:
Good point about the derail. Chocolate was known as the food of the Gods. That's what theobromine means. At least according to the info on the tour of the Chocolate Factory in Henderson, NV. Adding milk, sweeteners is what makes it an actual invention by man. It was just a crude drink when Europeans first became aware of it.

I studied the prostaglandin synthetase inhibitors on the graduate level. Tell me when it was ever evaluated in a scientific way for the canine species. It's been years since I combed the index medicus. I'd be surprised if our metabolism is any different from the dogs. Except I do agree that a dog can ingest much more chocolate than I can, and in literally one gulp, and they have less kg mass for the dosage, and much more efficient digestive systems.

Maybe my dog is just lucky chocolate is not left sitting around in my house. . . . it is consumed before it lands. . . . . and no I don't throw chocolate to my snarfer.

So to try to get back on topic a bit, how about this: maybe I didn't think it through the first time. Maybe letting couch potatos imbibe, in concentrated and sugared form, the Food of Gods, is really going way, waaaaay, wrong. Should we start a new cult with a high priest (me) who alone is allowed to indulge in this sacramental offering?

Would this end all wars??? or start a really big one????

Originally, it was the war parties and chiefs who alone were permitted to drink the crude herbal mash/drink, so this would bring us full circle.
Click to expand...

You claimed it was an urban legend, I was pointing out that it is not an urban legend that chocolate is not good for pets. And I have a hard time discounting veterinarian knowledge on the subject because of one class you may have taken in school.
 
shake+weight+for+men+pic.jpg


this

/thread
 
I think I could drag it out a little longer...

duct_tape_baby_mianro.jpg


John Crapped on his own name when he improved the functionality of the flush toilet.
 
Wait until someone starts the "longest thread" hinting at a guiness world record. . . . .

"always use the right tool for the right job"
 
LogGrad98 said:
You claimed it was an urban legend, I was pointing out that it is not an urban legend that chocolate is not good for pets. And I have a hard time discounting veterinarian knowledge on the subject because of one class you may have taken in school.
Click to expand...

I don't consider veterinary medicine and urban legends to be unique sets. meaning some shared items. actually, no need to qualify the first noun. . . . . I dunno, may Nuclear Physics escapes the curse, but certainly not astronomy, chemistry, or the social sciences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top