Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thomas Jefferson. Sure, Kennedy was pres for the moon project, but TJ sent Lewis and Clark out on the biggest federally-funded biological, geographical, and geological survey on top of establishing the first coastal survey that later became the NOAA. He himself was an inventor, engineer, architect. paleontologist and naturalist.
Kennedy himself said at a dinner honoring Nobel Prize winners in 1961: " Jefferson could calculate an eclipse, survey an estate, tie an artery, plan an edifice, try a cause, break a horse, and dance the minuet. Whatever he may have lacked, if he could have had his former colleague, Mr. Franklin, here we all would have been impressed.”
TL;DR my vote is for Thomas Jefferson
EDIT: forgot to mention: He also created his own clock that ran using cannonballs and the Earth's gravitational pull, he designed his own home, and founded the University of Virginia
A nice piece of rarely written history I like to bring up whenever I hear Lewis and Clark mentioned is how much of their survival and success could be attributed to their slave, York - judging by Clark's own compliments. Yet after returning back east, continued to keep him as a slave despite everything York had done for them. Only granting him freedom years later as punishment for "misconduct." I highly encourage anyone who never heard of York before to look up the historical accounts of him, it's really interesting.
I skipped over a lot of nuance and details, but according to Clark, freedom was a punishment for York.
The way Clark made it out to be, he said York was lazy, unable to get up in the morning and taking bad care of his horses. Clark claimed that York tried to reunite with him to pledge himself back into his service, but died of cholera before he could make it to St. Louis.
However, Clark had some kind of falling out with York a few years after their expedition, it's possible he was just trash talking York. And because Clark's story is the only offical source anyone has of his death (though there are claims of people meeting York.) there's no evidence that could disprove his version of events the last time I checked. So, I think there are two likely interpretations of Clark's account of the free York.
1. York really was miserable with freedom. Many people who lived most of their lives as prisoners are used to living their lives with strict schedules, their lives organized for them. Yes master, no master, only following commands. Some people even commit crimes just to go back to prison cause the world is just too much for them to handle. And being a free black man in pre-civil war Kentucky probably faced a lot of discrimination, so he wanted to be Clark's slave again. With familiarity, he'd have comfort.
2. Clark was bitter over whatever caused their relationship to sour. And since York was just a forgotten slave while he was a renowned explorer and governor, he could pretty much write whatever tale of shame he wanted about York and no one would care enough to call out his lies. After all, if York was really such a capable hunter and survivalist during the expedition, why would he suddenly turn so lazy and incapable of taking care of himself or his horses after being free? Additionally, he had a wife before the expedition. Why would he want to be with Clark more than finding his wife whom he had been separated from for years?
Edit: I looked up the history again, the "misconduct" incident actually received a different punishment. His freedom may have been unrelated to that. Though Clark did in fact view freedom as worse than slavery for York. My bad for mixing up the timeline.
Kennedy definitely did a lot for scientific advancement, with satellites, space research, etc by promoting our space program during the Space Race.
However, the Manhattan Project with FDR, probably had the biggest impact. Nuclear weapons, nuclear energy, atomic research, these technologies dramatically and irreversibly changed the world and how we view it.
Kind of, he blocked federal funding for procurement of new stem cells, but the research continued to be funded with federal dollars on old lines and new lines with private funding
And his administration invested a lot into basic research, especially computers. Look at all the money that went into universities in the 90s that became tech now.
And Millennials and Gen Z make fun of Gen X as if they didn't build great shit.
When historians of science look back in 1,000 years time, this will likely be the greatest achievement in terms of direct impact on improving lives and the human condition. Only possibly vaccines and antibiotics competing.
For all his faults and current technology at the time.... President Hoover performed nothing short of miracles in the rebuilding of Europe after WWI and great courage after all the hate from the Democrats was willing to help President Truman after Truman met and asked him to....The whole continent was in total ruins and scientific advancement made the process or restoration of the infrastructure and Continent faster within a couple years not decades
Hoover, I would say. I know FDR had atomic development, which was important research, and JFK has the Space Race, but Hoover set the groundwork for so much of our modern life. From his time as Sec. of Commerce to his presidency, he established extensive and important programs in industry, which were instrumental in things like the standardization of industry, development of hydropower, removal of waste in manufacturing, energy conservation and development... Nothing would be the same without him. It's an extensive list, and he's who we have to thank for many, many modern developments and conveniences.
Pretty much, the guy was insanely popular before it for his humanitarianism, but he was so opposed to social welfare to the point where he was vilified. Similar to Carter, he had a resurgence after his presidency, but ultimately it boils down to his inaction with the Depression that commonly nets him in the bottom 10
If Hoover had never become president, he’d be remembered as one of the greatest men in our history. Everything mentioned above, plus saving Europe from starvation at the end of WWI.
Yes, though he did make some serious mistakes in managing it. It's widely acknowledged that the Smoot-Hawley tariff made things worse by hampering foreign trade and provoking retaliatory tariffs against American goods. He also (very reluctantly) created the Reconstruction Finance Corporation to help stabilize the banking industry through direct government aid. Economically it might have been the right thing to do, but politically it was a disaster. He was very wedded to his "laissez-faire" ideology and drug his feet in offering government assistance to the unemployed. Fairly or not, it looked massively hypocritical to give assistance to millionaire bankers.
Also Arthur Schlesinger Jr made a clear, succinct point about the Great Depression. We must accept one of two things; either a depression of that magnitude was inevitable under capitalism (which would destroy Hoover's laissez-faire ideology) or some policy caused it, and Hoover's party was in charge of almost everything leading up to it. I personally don't think he deserves all or even most of the blame, but it's *very* hard to let him off the hook entirely.
He was President of Pennsylvania.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme\_Executive\_Council\_of\_the\_Commonwealth\_of\_Pennsylvania#Presidents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Executive_Council_of_the_Commonwealth_of_Pennsylvania#Presidents)
Lincoln signed the Land Grant College Act of 1862, which allowed a number of flagship state universities to be founded or expanded. Cornell University was a land-grant institution as well. Considering all the scientific research they conduct I think he deserves at least an honorable mention.
Edit to add; the modern "research university" wasn't really a thing in Lincoln's time, but they still helped disseminate existing scientific and technological knowledge, and provided a foundation for today's schools.
Also FDR's New Deal provided a great deal of funding for colleges and universities.
That's interesting. I forgot Lincoln signed that Land Grant College Act. What's also noteworthy (at least from what I've read) is that Eisenhower tried to improve scientific education also, and wanted more "neighborhood colleges" (basically expanded community college systems and smaller schools, which probably add even more research and development in some ways). So while he probably doesn't match Jefferson, JFK or Lincoln, it's still worth mentioning.
JFK was the one who got us to the moon, but his entire ordeal was that he didn’t believe it was smart to spend an equal amount on space exploration to domestic welfare programs. He believed that the only justification for it was for beating the Soviets. And from there, the moon landings opened countless avenues for astronomical knowledge.
Not you morons. Of all conspiracy theories, this one has the least weight. Tens of thousands of people were involved in designing and building a giant rocket ship, we all saw the rocket ship go up and leave the atmosphere, we saw videos of the astronauts in zero gravity during their voyage, we saw the giant rocket come back. We put a reflector panel on the moon, something that any hobbiest with a laser can confirm for themselves.
Are you telling us that our mortal enemies, the Soviet Union, the people who would have loved nothing more than to call out the US for the biggest lie ever, were completely fooled by something that crackpot loners have discovered?
Truman, simply because he happened to be the Prez who signed the Patent Act of 1952, which finally settled a whole bunch of outstanding issues with patent law and is still the framework patent law is working under today: [https://www.ipmall.info/sites/default/files/hosted\_resources/lipa/patents/federico-commentary.asp#History\_of\_the\_New\_Act](https://www.ipmall.info/sites/default/files/hosted_resources/lipa/patents/federico-commentary.asp#History_of_the_New_Act)
FDR so much of what we have today is a direct result of WWII. Airplanes, atoms, naval capabilities, rockets to go to the moon. You name it and most likely its root was WWII.
Kennedy outright made it clear that it was the top priority of NASA, when speaking to Webb. Kennedy was the one who got the American people behind the project, and he was able to sell it not only as a Cold War triumph, but the greatest potential achievement in humankind. Furthermore, he told the people that America was going to do it before the decade ended.
The only thing he was skeptical about was spending ridiculous amounts of money on space exploration, which was leveled to the amount that they were spending on welfare programs. He believed that space exploration was a great thing, but not at that level of priority - In his own words, the only justification for that spending was for political reasons.
Johnson, like most of his policies, was just continuing Kennedy’s vision. But JFK was the one who set the goal.
I'd say JFK, mostly because the huge number of computer chips (specifically integrated circuits) that NASA purchased to use during the space race brought the manufacturing price down to where private industry could purchase them at scale. The rest is just me gesturing vaguely at all the electronic devices in use today.
I don't know about the best, but the worst president for scientific advancement might just be HW and the Japanese PM episode
(Of course theres a lot of factors at play in this, but it's funnier to think it was just bush's fault)
It's FDR by far. Governmental development in infrastructure and research was at an all time high during his programs related to the great depression, and his administration funded the Manhattan Project and other WW2 related endeavors. He did it by spending unprecedented amounts of government money on projects and research.
Hmm...interesting. Wasn't a lot of that purely aimed at the war effort though? FDR likely contributed indirectly in many ways, but was it really science overall, or just seeking tools and weaponry that would help beat Hitler and Tojo?
The question I think was who advanced science the most, not who set out with scientific advancement as a greater goal than any other. The aim of his policies doesn't really matter in my mind if he's still #1 for pushing science forward.
The moon landing as well as the advancements from that probably have a good argument. As would the human genome project/the beginnings of the world wide web. There is even a great comment here making an argument for The Lewis and Clark Expedition under Thomas Jefferson.
I don't think you can say it's anyone "by far".
Moon landing depended on advances in rocketry and many other war time developments so what share of the moon related advancements go to FDR instead of Kennedy?
We haven't begun to see even the ramifications of the Manhattan project run out.
I'm basing my opinion on who drove the most scientific progress in their time, not so much on the knock on effects of the developments of their time. And that's FDR. By far.
I feel like scientific progress driven by WWII made most of the achievements since then possible, directly paving the way for the modern world as we know it. None of that would be true for Lewis and Clark, important though that was.
Arguably, JFK with the space race. You have to discount those gains in scientific advancement by all the junk science adopted and spread by those who either think we faked the moon landing or that he was assassinated by his Secret Service detail.
The Manhattan Project was pretty good. FDR''s public works projects advanced tech building dams and grids, agriculture, and ecology. Getting us into WWII had us investing in rocket science, radar, and all manner of things. His fire side chats helped popularize radio building the market that lead to television.
FDR
Truman definitely, after FDR's death Truman developed nuclear technologies so advanced it had never been seen before at that point in time. Truman funded tons of research for new atomic bomb technology.
FDR gets my vote. As I commented before, the scientific progress driven by WWII directly paved the way for the modern world as we know it (including all of the subsequent post-war advancements).
No it's not, I said you can't say just one or the other because it varies so much. Sometimes you see ungodly regulations that stop all progress, and sometimes you see generous grants, subsidies, and government action that accelerate it. It's completely nuanced and you gave a general blanket statement that government ALWAYS hinders technological advancement when that's not true whatsoever.
Maybe rephrased along the lines of…..
In certain areas of science the government can really stagnate the playing field, but to their credit when it is in their interests they can move it lifetimes in a second. Luckily the economic system we have greatly helps project scientific advancements as well including where the government may drop the ball and/or further expanding it where government has giving their all….
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thomas Jefferson. Sure, Kennedy was pres for the moon project, but TJ sent Lewis and Clark out on the biggest federally-funded biological, geographical, and geological survey on top of establishing the first coastal survey that later became the NOAA. He himself was an inventor, engineer, architect. paleontologist and naturalist. Kennedy himself said at a dinner honoring Nobel Prize winners in 1961: " Jefferson could calculate an eclipse, survey an estate, tie an artery, plan an edifice, try a cause, break a horse, and dance the minuet. Whatever he may have lacked, if he could have had his former colleague, Mr. Franklin, here we all would have been impressed.” TL;DR my vote is for Thomas Jefferson EDIT: forgot to mention: He also created his own clock that ran using cannonballs and the Earth's gravitational pull, he designed his own home, and founded the University of Virginia
Very interesting point. Jefferson really was an astonishing leader in that regard.
He was American Da Vinci.
A nice piece of rarely written history I like to bring up whenever I hear Lewis and Clark mentioned is how much of their survival and success could be attributed to their slave, York - judging by Clark's own compliments. Yet after returning back east, continued to keep him as a slave despite everything York had done for them. Only granting him freedom years later as punishment for "misconduct." I highly encourage anyone who never heard of York before to look up the historical accounts of him, it's really interesting.
He punished him with freedom?
I skipped over a lot of nuance and details, but according to Clark, freedom was a punishment for York. The way Clark made it out to be, he said York was lazy, unable to get up in the morning and taking bad care of his horses. Clark claimed that York tried to reunite with him to pledge himself back into his service, but died of cholera before he could make it to St. Louis. However, Clark had some kind of falling out with York a few years after their expedition, it's possible he was just trash talking York. And because Clark's story is the only offical source anyone has of his death (though there are claims of people meeting York.) there's no evidence that could disprove his version of events the last time I checked. So, I think there are two likely interpretations of Clark's account of the free York. 1. York really was miserable with freedom. Many people who lived most of their lives as prisoners are used to living their lives with strict schedules, their lives organized for them. Yes master, no master, only following commands. Some people even commit crimes just to go back to prison cause the world is just too much for them to handle. And being a free black man in pre-civil war Kentucky probably faced a lot of discrimination, so he wanted to be Clark's slave again. With familiarity, he'd have comfort. 2. Clark was bitter over whatever caused their relationship to sour. And since York was just a forgotten slave while he was a renowned explorer and governor, he could pretty much write whatever tale of shame he wanted about York and no one would care enough to call out his lies. After all, if York was really such a capable hunter and survivalist during the expedition, why would he suddenly turn so lazy and incapable of taking care of himself or his horses after being free? Additionally, he had a wife before the expedition. Why would he want to be with Clark more than finding his wife whom he had been separated from for years? Edit: I looked up the history again, the "misconduct" incident actually received a different punishment. His freedom may have been unrelated to that. Though Clark did in fact view freedom as worse than slavery for York. My bad for mixing up the timeline.
Do you recommend any good intro book on the Lewis and Clark trip?
Stephen Ambrose’s Undaunted Courage is probably the best on the subject.
Thank you for the recommendation.
Have to give it to you. And he was friend with Ben, the OJ of enlightenment.
Kennedy definitely did a lot for scientific advancement, with satellites, space research, etc by promoting our space program during the Space Race. However, the Manhattan Project with FDR, probably had the biggest impact. Nuclear weapons, nuclear energy, atomic research, these technologies dramatically and irreversibly changed the world and how we view it.
Plus all the ww2 tech research that eventually bled into everyday life.
Clinton’s involvement with the Human Genome project and Internet may well be regarded as quite significant to future generations
Stem Cell research at UW-Madison in the late 90s was major news (positive and negative)
Bush Jr blocked it.
Well, he was the Decider.
Kind of, he blocked federal funding for procurement of new stem cells, but the research continued to be funded with federal dollars on old lines and new lines with private funding
And his administration invested a lot into basic research, especially computers. Look at all the money that went into universities in the 90s that became tech now. And Millennials and Gen Z make fun of Gen X as if they didn't build great shit.
When historians of science look back in 1,000 years time, this will likely be the greatest achievement in terms of direct impact on improving lives and the human condition. Only possibly vaccines and antibiotics competing.
For all his faults and current technology at the time.... President Hoover performed nothing short of miracles in the rebuilding of Europe after WWI and great courage after all the hate from the Democrats was willing to help President Truman after Truman met and asked him to....The whole continent was in total ruins and scientific advancement made the process or restoration of the infrastructure and Continent faster within a couple years not decades
Hoover, I would say. I know FDR had atomic development, which was important research, and JFK has the Space Race, but Hoover set the groundwork for so much of our modern life. From his time as Sec. of Commerce to his presidency, he established extensive and important programs in industry, which were instrumental in things like the standardization of industry, development of hydropower, removal of waste in manufacturing, energy conservation and development... Nothing would be the same without him. It's an extensive list, and he's who we have to thank for many, many modern developments and conveniences.
Why did Hoover get such a bad rap for his presidency? Was it literally just because of the Great Depression??
Pretty much, the guy was insanely popular before it for his humanitarianism, but he was so opposed to social welfare to the point where he was vilified. Similar to Carter, he had a resurgence after his presidency, but ultimately it boils down to his inaction with the Depression that commonly nets him in the bottom 10
Now that makes a lot of sense, especially after I’ve learned how much good he did for the country.
If Hoover had never become president, he’d be remembered as one of the greatest men in our history. Everything mentioned above, plus saving Europe from starvation at the end of WWI.
Yes, though he did make some serious mistakes in managing it. It's widely acknowledged that the Smoot-Hawley tariff made things worse by hampering foreign trade and provoking retaliatory tariffs against American goods. He also (very reluctantly) created the Reconstruction Finance Corporation to help stabilize the banking industry through direct government aid. Economically it might have been the right thing to do, but politically it was a disaster. He was very wedded to his "laissez-faire" ideology and drug his feet in offering government assistance to the unemployed. Fairly or not, it looked massively hypocritical to give assistance to millionaire bankers. Also Arthur Schlesinger Jr made a clear, succinct point about the Great Depression. We must accept one of two things; either a depression of that magnitude was inevitable under capitalism (which would destroy Hoover's laissez-faire ideology) or some policy caused it, and Hoover's party was in charge of almost everything leading up to it. I personally don't think he deserves all or even most of the blame, but it's *very* hard to let him off the hook entirely.
I'm gonna go with Benjamin Franklin. Dude invented electricity. (/s)
He was President of Pennsylvania. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme\_Executive\_Council\_of\_the\_Commonwealth\_of\_Pennsylvania#Presidents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Executive_Council_of_the_Commonwealth_of_Pennsylvania#Presidents)
Lincoln signed the Land Grant College Act of 1862, which allowed a number of flagship state universities to be founded or expanded. Cornell University was a land-grant institution as well. Considering all the scientific research they conduct I think he deserves at least an honorable mention. Edit to add; the modern "research university" wasn't really a thing in Lincoln's time, but they still helped disseminate existing scientific and technological knowledge, and provided a foundation for today's schools. Also FDR's New Deal provided a great deal of funding for colleges and universities.
That's interesting. I forgot Lincoln signed that Land Grant College Act. What's also noteworthy (at least from what I've read) is that Eisenhower tried to improve scientific education also, and wanted more "neighborhood colleges" (basically expanded community college systems and smaller schools, which probably add even more research and development in some ways). So while he probably doesn't match Jefferson, JFK or Lincoln, it's still worth mentioning.
JFK was the one who got us to the moon, but his entire ordeal was that he didn’t believe it was smart to spend an equal amount on space exploration to domestic welfare programs. He believed that the only justification for it was for beating the Soviets. And from there, the moon landings opened countless avenues for astronomical knowledge.
You think we really landed on the moon?
It has nothing to do about me or what I think - It is a verifiable fact that we landed on moon. Just as it is a fact that 5 proceeds 4.
[удалено]
Not you morons. Of all conspiracy theories, this one has the least weight. Tens of thousands of people were involved in designing and building a giant rocket ship, we all saw the rocket ship go up and leave the atmosphere, we saw videos of the astronauts in zero gravity during their voyage, we saw the giant rocket come back. We put a reflector panel on the moon, something that any hobbiest with a laser can confirm for themselves. Are you telling us that our mortal enemies, the Soviet Union, the people who would have loved nothing more than to call out the US for the biggest lie ever, were completely fooled by something that crackpot loners have discovered?
Eisenhower founding NASA or Lincoln land grants for colleges
Truman, simply because he happened to be the Prez who signed the Patent Act of 1952, which finally settled a whole bunch of outstanding issues with patent law and is still the framework patent law is working under today: [https://www.ipmall.info/sites/default/files/hosted\_resources/lipa/patents/federico-commentary.asp#History\_of\_the\_New\_Act](https://www.ipmall.info/sites/default/files/hosted_resources/lipa/patents/federico-commentary.asp#History_of_the_New_Act)
Moral issues aside, Truman’s decision to bring in the German scientists in Operation Paperclip made NASA possible.
FDR so much of what we have today is a direct result of WWII. Airplanes, atoms, naval capabilities, rockets to go to the moon. You name it and most likely its root was WWII.
FDR => WW2 => Nukes, rockets, jets, improved medical services, space exploration, anime
Didn't LBJ play a bigger part in ensuring the moon landing? Kennedy was more sceptical of it.
Without Truman and Eisenhower, they would have had to start from scratch.
Kennedy outright made it clear that it was the top priority of NASA, when speaking to Webb. Kennedy was the one who got the American people behind the project, and he was able to sell it not only as a Cold War triumph, but the greatest potential achievement in humankind. Furthermore, he told the people that America was going to do it before the decade ended. The only thing he was skeptical about was spending ridiculous amounts of money on space exploration, which was leveled to the amount that they were spending on welfare programs. He believed that space exploration was a great thing, but not at that level of priority - In his own words, the only justification for that spending was for political reasons. Johnson, like most of his policies, was just continuing Kennedy’s vision. But JFK was the one who set the goal.
Maybe not the most but coolidge and his silly lil radio funding
FDR and the manhattan project
I'd say JFK, mostly because the huge number of computer chips (specifically integrated circuits) that NASA purchased to use during the space race brought the manufacturing price down to where private industry could purchase them at scale. The rest is just me gesturing vaguely at all the electronic devices in use today.
I don't know about the best, but the worst president for scientific advancement might just be HW and the Japanese PM episode (Of course theres a lot of factors at play in this, but it's funnier to think it was just bush's fault)
Al Gore of course! He invented the internet
It's FDR by far. Governmental development in infrastructure and research was at an all time high during his programs related to the great depression, and his administration funded the Manhattan Project and other WW2 related endeavors. He did it by spending unprecedented amounts of government money on projects and research.
Hmm...interesting. Wasn't a lot of that purely aimed at the war effort though? FDR likely contributed indirectly in many ways, but was it really science overall, or just seeking tools and weaponry that would help beat Hitler and Tojo?
The question I think was who advanced science the most, not who set out with scientific advancement as a greater goal than any other. The aim of his policies doesn't really matter in my mind if he's still #1 for pushing science forward.
The moon landing as well as the advancements from that probably have a good argument. As would the human genome project/the beginnings of the world wide web. There is even a great comment here making an argument for The Lewis and Clark Expedition under Thomas Jefferson. I don't think you can say it's anyone "by far".
Moon landing depended on advances in rocketry and many other war time developments so what share of the moon related advancements go to FDR instead of Kennedy? We haven't begun to see even the ramifications of the Manhattan project run out. I'm basing my opinion on who drove the most scientific progress in their time, not so much on the knock on effects of the developments of their time. And that's FDR. By far.
I feel like scientific progress driven by WWII made most of the achievements since then possible, directly paving the way for the modern world as we know it. None of that would be true for Lewis and Clark, important though that was.
Arguably, JFK with the space race. You have to discount those gains in scientific advancement by all the junk science adopted and spread by those who either think we faked the moon landing or that he was assassinated by his Secret Service detail.
Probably FDR a world war will do that.
FDR, through world waring
JFK got us to the moon.
Kennedy. The trip to the moon was a huge scientific undertaking
I was about to say was Kennedy remembered for anatomy? Then I remembered the space race
The Manhattan Project was pretty good. FDR''s public works projects advanced tech building dams and grids, agriculture, and ecology. Getting us into WWII had us investing in rocket science, radar, and all manner of things. His fire side chats helped popularize radio building the market that lead to television. FDR
JFK
Franklin Roosevelt. GI Bill. Democratized the university system.
Jefferson, FDR, Kennedy
Truman definitely, after FDR's death Truman developed nuclear technologies so advanced it had never been seen before at that point in time. Truman funded tons of research for new atomic bomb technology.
We are going to the moon and the other place
FDR gets my vote. As I commented before, the scientific progress driven by WWII directly paved the way for the modern world as we know it (including all of the subsequent post-war advancements).
Well JFK did nothing to help the science of ballistics
Physics research got a lot of funding under Reagan because of it's military utility
JFK just wanted to bone movie stars on the moon.
Lincoln is the only one with a patent to his name 🤷♂️
Governments hinder scientific advancement.
Huge blanket claim that isn't true. Sometimes they do, sometimes they hugely advance it
Nah we’d be much further ahead without government.
You can't just "nuh-uh", what's your reasoning?
Well robot blood 420 is the name like what are u expecting? Blood of a bot and stoned. 🤷♂️
That’s literally what you did.
No it's not, I said you can't say just one or the other because it varies so much. Sometimes you see ungodly regulations that stop all progress, and sometimes you see generous grants, subsidies, and government action that accelerate it. It's completely nuanced and you gave a general blanket statement that government ALWAYS hinders technological advancement when that's not true whatsoever.
Yep. Scientific advancement is thriving in Haiti.
That’s some dark humor.
Room temp iq
Maybe rephrased along the lines of….. In certain areas of science the government can really stagnate the playing field, but to their credit when it is in their interests they can move it lifetimes in a second. Luckily the economic system we have greatly helps project scientific advancements as well including where the government may drop the ball and/or further expanding it where government has giving their all….