An Inconvenient Truth

The difference between create and invent is not a mere matter of semantics. There is a real difference and it's kind of sad that people don't know the difference.

Definition of Invent:


Definition of Create:


I can claim that I created a car which obviously isn't the same as claiming to have invented a car. As with everything else in life you have to know something about the context of the discussion. Gore's congressional record and his support for DARPA shows that he had a hand in the creation of the internet by providing research funds and a substantial one at that ($1.7 billion).
There is only one internet though, not like cars, so creating it would be inventing it. And it's not like the money he gave was out of his own pocket.

There is only one internet though, not like cars, so creating it would be inventing it. And it's not like the money he gave was out of his own pocket.Gore invented the internet just like he is a good person to the earth jetting around the place in his private jets. I guess if he is claiming that the mons-ey spent by the goverment invented the internet than we all did as tax payers. I Bryan invented the internet along with Gore.

Just because one supports something or just because someone helped get money appropriated doesn't mean he or she invented or created it. They simply helped the person or persons who did the creating. Trying to argue the semantics or created versus invented is dumb. He took credit as one who was responsible for the actual existence of the internet in a physical way which is just not true in any way. The internet existed before Al Gore was even in congress. The internet's transition into a mainstream communiction tool was helped by monies from congress of which Gore supported, even spearheaded. But that's not what he intimated when he said "created". It just isn't.

FRPLg Congress may have helped speed up the development of the internet but with what it has provided to the business world is what really developed the net to what it is today. If there was no pontential for advertising and the other uses for business it would be nothing of what it is today.

I find it scary that some of you still dont believe in global warming.

I find it scary that some of you still dont believe in global warming.

I certainly believe in Global Warming. Did anyone say they didn't?

FRPLg Congress may have helped speed up the development of the internet but with what it has provided to the business world is what really developed the net to what it is today. If there was no pontential for advertising and the other uses for business it would be nothing of what it is today.

No I agree.

The thought that something like the internet is the product of a series of events each of which was absoulutely necessary is ridiculous. I am pretty sure the internet is no better or worse off because of Al Gore or any politician for that matter.

I certainly believe in Global Warming. Did anyone say they didn't?

I didn't read anyone here say the didn't believe in it.

Anyways there is a not so insignificant portion of people and scientists who don't just question the human cause theory of global warming but the idea of global warming in general.

I find it scary that something that seems so important is treated in such a political way when it needs to be treated in a scientific way first and foremost.

Anyways there is a not so insignificant portion of people and scientists who don't just question the human cause theory of global warming but the idea of global warming in general.

My understanding is that almost all scientists agree that: (a) greenhouse emissions are making the ozone hole bigger; (b) the increased size of the ozone is bad; and (c) the climate is getting hotter, at least in part due to man. I haven't heard nayone debate (a) and (b) and only a few people debate (c). The debate now seems to center on whether such changes are as bad as people think they are.

I don't know how bad of a situation we are in because I'm not a scientist. Consequently, I'll simply defer to the overwhelming majority of scientists who do believe (perhaps incorrectly) that we are screwing things up in a big way.


As for politics getting in the way of this debate, I think both sides do it. The Dems and Left viciously attack anyone who questions whether global warming is taking place and how much harm it is creating. The Bush Administration tries to suppress any statements/studies that don't suit their political agenda.

This discussion isn't going anywhere but lets be clear on one thing, creating and inventing are not the same. To perpetuate the idea that they are the same is a Definist fallacy and disingenuous.

A number of senators have taken initiatives in creating things over the years. Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska took initiative in creating The Bridge to Nowhere but that doesn't mean that he invented the concept of a bridge or built it himself.

They simply helped the person or persons who did the creating.

So, if I help you create something by getting you the resources needed to do the work I can't claim on my resume that I took the initiative in creating the final product? Shouldn't I be entitled to some credit? What are the standards for getting recognition for my contribution?

As for the internet, let's not confuse it with the world wide web. I'm not going to give a history lesson on the internet, you will have to do your own research on that subject. I'll just say this, the internet is a collection of internets (a network of networks), there are many world wide web (the French have their own sites). No single person can claim to have invented the internet as it was build by standing on the shoulders of giants. In fact, no single group can claim to have invented it without giving credit to someone else or some other group. Lastly, Al Gore is not claiming to have invented the internet.