Most Influential Individual of the 20th Century

[Gav-bt]

Willow, I almost took you seriously until you mentioned Germaine Greer. Hasn't it occured to you ockers why she lives in a small enclave (Probably Hampstead Heath) of London?

 

[Gav-bt]

75% of the Worlds inventions originate in the United Kingdom -Discovery Channel.

Now, even if that's a half truth, it's still a massive amount.

 

[Willow]

yeah, but Germaine's an Aussie.
I thought it was an impressive list and I didnt even mention the Hills Hoist or the Victa lawn mower.

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

Victor Changs heart work and Dr Fred Hollows work with eyes (not the LWOS type) should be recognised as well

Cheers,
Moffo

 

[Willow]

Yes offcourse Moffo... can't forget them.

Fred Hollows was a frustrated bloke who was fairly bitter when he died... and with justification.I guess he just got sick of dealing withbureaucrats and their bottom lines.
He did a great many things but also went into third world conditions to treatthe locals who amongst other things, were suffering from cataracts. He came across people who wereblind and gave them their sight back with the most simplest and inexpensive of operations.

Without getting too dramatic about it, hesaw people living in absolute poverty and took upon himself treat them.
For those who havent guessed, these 'third world' conditions were not in Africa, Asia or South America but right here in the Australian outback.

 

[CanadianSteve]

This thread reminds of of an interesting topic. Maybe it should have come up in the Thoughts on Society thread by now, but hasn't.

How much influence do individuals have over history, anyway. There is a "great man" view of history that says great individuals can change the course of history. Other historians disagree, saying social and economic forces cause changes, and individuals don't make much difference, or are just in the right place at the right time.I may be presenting this too simplistically, but I think that's the general idea.

What do others think about this? For example, would WW2 have occurred without Hitler?

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

"What do others think about this? For example, would WW2 have occurred without Hitler?"

Yep. Id say yes anyway. Hitler was only one dimension of a war that was fought on many lines. If Hitler didn't control and organise the Nazis, im sure someone else would've. Id find it hard to believe that other people in Germany didn't have the same idea as Hitler in the 30s

Moffo

 

This message has been deleted due to termination of membership.

 

[CyberKev]

The Long and the Short of it: A concise metric penile history of the world
By Johnson J. Johnson (leading anatomical historian)

The following is an excerpt lifted from this semenal body of work...

It is true that when most people think of shock upsets in the present day, they almost invariably conjure forth imagery of General George C. Custer’s humiliating innings defeat (inside of two days, no less) at Little Big Horn Stadium in 1876. Custer was, of course, in actual truth a Colonel NOT a general, which was somewhat apt given that his manhood was definitely more in keeping with a KFC Colonel Burger than a Hungry Jacks Whopper with cheese. Social issues were clearly driving Custer over that fateful summer, with the North American people keenly seeking expansion into the furthermost corners of the oh so wild, wild, west. It is just unfortunate that in overreaching for kilometres (of land) they were so unwise as to turn to a man who was underachieving in inches (so to speak). Whichever way you look at it, history has definitely proven that the Big Horn was no safe place for a Small Horn when the shit went down at sun up.

Custer’s effort was pretty damn ordinary alright, but to focus attention too heavily on the Colonel is to overlook an even more dismal showing some 1867 years earlier. Roman ‘General’ Varus was undoubtedly a “big man on continent” at this time, although this status casually elided the fact that he didn’t have a penis, much to his considerable chagrin. It is likely that this missing digit played a prominent role in Varus’ decision to pursue a career as a lawyer, given that the preening and posturing inherent in the job served as compensation (of a sort) for the yawning chasm in his lower tunic. Things went awfully awry for Varus, however, when his puerile pompousness caught the attention of the Emperor’s niece and (quicker than you could say “How’s your dildo, Darlin’?”) the ill-fated duo were hitched. This left poor Varus with little option other than to ascend to the Roman captaincy, given that the Ancient nation’s obsession with long protracted away campaigns provided an ideal solution to his marital angst. Alas and alack, while Varus was a perfectly competent lawyer, he was nonetheless totally shite as a leader of men! This was proven beyond reasonable doubt when Varus led the Roman team on its first full-on tour to East Germany in 9 AD, where the side proceeded to perform well below its previously lofty standards. The team was returning to Rome, via a charity benefit clash with a Chieftain’s XI (thousand) team in West Germany, when they fell victim to a cunning ruse by a hitherto little known provocateur by the name of Armenius. Armenius had been a surprise (but inspired) choice as skipper of a ragtag band of boorish Goth Barbarians that were something akin to Eddie Barlow’s ‘Cavaliers’ squad during the World Series Cricket era (except, nothing like it really). Armenius’ selection was surely influenced by the fact that he was in possession of a positively prodigious prong, which ensured that this alleged contest was going to be an anti-climactic (wasn’t it always for Varus?) non-event. Legend has it that Armenius’ german sausage was so obscenely large that it was the only piece of organic pants padding ever to be visible (beneath clothing) from Roman horseback at a distance of 800 metres. Poor bastards never stood a chance! Varus hadn’t even realised that he was at the Teutoburg Forest ground when reality dawned on him that Armenius had sent him in to bat on a particularly nasty green top. They were dutifully routed by the same margin as Custer’s side; being the first team to lose by such a scoreline and remaining — to this day — the only side to lose by an innings WITHOUT making the opposition bat once. Suffice to say the Board was mightily pissed-off about this back in Rome, as it meant that 2000 limited edition ‘invincibles’ commemorative breastplates went the way of the unicorn. It is hard to conceive of how one nation could suffer so much on account of one man’s want of a penis!

Ancient Rome had, of course, enjoyed happier times under the polished leadership of Julius Caesar. It was well documented that Julius was endowed with a whopping Willy, but few could have known that Big Jules was toting a weapon that was replete with prosthetic enhancements. Marc Anthony was one person who was in the know and, as was the case with anything and everything, he was only too happy to follow his mentor’s lead. Marc was unable to wield his willow with the same adroitness as Big Jules in battle, but he was able to perform with similar aplomb insofar as his negotiations with Cleopatra were concerned. It is all too often said that “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”. You will be far less likely to hear the alternative maxim that for Rome “the road to Cairo was braved by long extensions”, although it is equally apt an expression in historical terms.

Jumping forward to 1587 we are made privy to the mother of all penile misconceptions, and the untold misery that one simple error of judgement would wreak on the Spanish military. For some years prior, the Spaniard Catholics had been touched-up in key battles with English Protestants and were thus itching for a chance to sick their fab new naval Armada on the whinging Poms. The dispatching of the Armada had seemed like a fait accompli given the social conditions at work at the time, but the deal would not be sealed until Queen Mary received visual confirmation that naval commander the Duke of Medina Sidonia was hung like a Palomino stallion. Sadly for Mary, she could not have imagined during her many subsequent bathtime daydreams that the Duke’s dick was one that looked good in the bath and that was pretty much all she wrote. As any pilot will tell you, it is far better to have a little Fokker that can get ‘air borne’ than it is to have a big Boeing minus its engines. This was thus a marvellous stroke of luck for bed-wetting Englishman, Sir Francis Drake who was charged with defending Queen and Country armed with a decidedly inadequate dingletwang. Such good fortune followed England around for several centuries, before the laws of nature finally caught up with the motherland. Many historians choose to blame the decline of the British Empire on trivial factors, such as the country’s alleged inability to adequately keep pace with the altering modes of global economy and production. This is utter bollocks, of course, as blame must be apportioned to the country’s unerring capacity for producing poorly proportioned male stock.

Britain’s privileged place as a global superpower was hastily assumed by the USA; a feat made all the more commendable due to the American peoples’ continuing fetish for electing Presidents with appallingly tiny tockleys! They didn’t come much smaller than Richard Milhouse Nixon, whose incurable penis envy of John Fitzgerald Kennedy would eventually drive him balmier than a barnyard cat in a bushfire. Poor old ‘Tricky Dicky’ did all he could to compensate by making massive political inroads into China and the Soviet Union, but the constituents remained suitably unimpressed. Nixon couldn’t fathom the simple truth that American people, by and large, were convinced that both the Chinese and the Ruskies were inferior beings on account of their menfolk sporting pitifully puny doodles. In accordance with this, any Yank leader unwise enough to be sympathetic to such peoples would be so for a very basic and disturbing reason. Few world leaders have been so inept at obfuscating the minimalist measurements of their manhood as Nixon was...

It would be unwise to pursue any relevant discussions on great historical figures without taking the time to talk of Adolph Hitler. Hitler is undoubtedly the number one ‘nearly man’ of world history, and much contention has surrounded his daft decision to invade Russia in the middle of winter. The question routinely arises — “why didn’t Adolph learn from Napoleon’s mistake on this one?!” This poser is all too easily answered. Hitler’s decision to invade was not influenced by trifling elements such as weather conditions, but moreover was driven by his resolute belief that Napoleon had failed purely because he was a jumped-up, toadying little Frog twit with a microscopic weewee! There was much merit in this assertion, given that were you to pit Bonaparte against the average Aryan male you wouldn’t have any trouble in telling his bone apart. The (oh so) Little Corporal had only been able to launch his own foolish invasion by convincing the hapless male population of France that the secret to obtaining a larger, longer, thicker schlong could only be found in new age Moscow porn shops. Such matters did not fuss the German populace of Hitler’s time though, as having been screwed royally by anyone and everyone for several decades, a tool was pretty much a tool to them regardless of length and girth. Hitler’s plan was nevertheless flawed, however, as he neglected to factor his own feeble frankfurter into the invasion equation, a folly made all the more disastrous by virtue of the German leader having only one ball to bless himself with.

It is indeed irksome that so many of my peers should choose to dispute such plainly accurate accounts of historical progression. This can be attributed to the pitiful penile dimensions of the average contemporary male historian. I recently had Stuart McIntyre stay over at my place for a week long research hiatus. All was going swimmingly until a sequence of accidental events led to him copping a glimpseof yours truly naked but for thigh boots in the conservatory. I can quote him here as reacting to this unexpected eyeful with the following exclamation — “Good God Man! That thing isgargantuan enough to hang an obese woman’s laundry on!!!” Really, you would think that the bastards could raise enough professionalism to get over their obvious jealousy!

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

wow! interesting read mate

Moffo

 

[MistyBee9-11]

Cyber Kev, I take your points re Martin Luther King and Mother Teresa. However, Tmie is a US based mag, and, as such, US icons would figure prominently. I fail to see how Martin Luther King changed my life, or life in Australia. If you are talking about indigenous or 'oppressed' sub races gaining strength and dignity and therefore greater frreedoms, look first to Ghandi, Emily Pankhurst, Haile Selase (sp), or even more obscure influences like the influences of black American entertainers from the 20's to 50's, the backlash to the Holocause, and the rise of communism and imperial Japan (both of whom threw off the shackles of monarchism and imperialism.

Mother Theresa was a symbolic person who stood for tolerance and welfare of the needy. She carried an old message, but did she influence the planet like Henry Ford, or Marconi? I think not.

When I raised the internet idea, I was wondering whether it was really a big enough influence on the 20th century (given that we all didn't latch on until about '95 or later), or weather it will be the biggest influence of the 21st century). Either way, it's hard to go past whoever brought up the Gutenberg press.

 

[CanadianSteve]

Yes, when A&E picked Gutenberg #1 in their top 100 individuals of the millenium (1000-2000), they justified it by saying he was the originator of all mass communications that followed - radio, TV, telephone, internet.

I wish I could get a copy of that list - it was the top 100 individuals of the Millenium - because it's interesting to see where they ranked various politicians, inventors, writers, musicians, etc. I couldn't find it on their website, and I emailed them asking for it but haven't got a response yet.

Is the Arts and Entertainment channel shown in Aus, or is it just in NA?

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

This should cause some controversey

Ive found it Steve, or at least i think i have lol

<table cellspacing=10 cellpadding=0 border=0> <tbody> <tr> <td align=middle colspan=6> <center> <u>BIOGRAPHY® OF THE MILLENNIUM</u> Names the Top 100
Most Influential People of the Past 1,000 Years
[/B] Gutenberg tops the list! With BIOGRAPHY anchor Harry Smith</U> </center>
</td></tr> <tr> <td>1. </td> <td>Gutenberg, Johann </td> <td>35. </td> <td>Lenin, Vladimir </td> <td>69. </td> <td>Harvey, William </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>2. </td> <td valign=top>Newton, Isaac </td> <td valign=top>36. </td> <td valign=top>Fleming, Alexander </td> <td valign=top>70. </td> <td valign=top>Pope Gregory Vll </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>3. </td> <td valign=top>Luther, Martin </td> <td valign=top>37. </td> <td valign=top>Voltaire </td> <td valign=top>71. </td> <td valign=top>Tubman, Harriet </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>4. </td> <td valign=top>Darwin, Charles </td> <td valign=top>38. </td> <td valign=top>Bacon, Francis </td> <td valign=top>72. </td> <td valign=top>Bolivar, Simon </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>5. </td> <td valign=top>Shakespeare, William </td> <td valign=top>39. </td> <td valign=top>Alighieri, Dante </td> <td valign=top>73. </td> <td valign=top>Princess Diana </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>6. </td> <td valign=top>Columbus, Christopher </td> <td valign=top>40. </td> <td valign=top>Wright Brothers </td> <td valign=top>74. </td> <td valign=top>Fermi, Enrico </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>7. </td> <td valign=top>Marx, Karl </td> <td valign=top>41. </td> <td valign=top>Gates, Bill </td> <td valign=top>75. </td> <td valign=top>Pincus, Gregory </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>8. </td> <td valign=top>Einstein, Albert </td> <td valign=top>42. </td> <td valign=top>Mendel, Gregor </td> <td valign=top>76. </td> <td valign=top>The Beatles </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>9. </td> <td valign=top>Copernicus, Nicolaus </td> <td valign=top>43. </td> <td valign=top>Mao, Zedong </td> <td valign=top>77. </td> <td valign=top>Hobbes, Thomas </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>10. </td> <td valign=top>Galileo Galilei </td> <td valign=top>44. </td> <td valign=top>Bell, Alexander Graham </td> <td valign=top>78. </td> <td valign=top>Isabella </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>11. </td> <td valign=top>Da Vinci, Leonardo </td> <td valign=top>45. </td> <td valign=top>William the Conqueror </td> <td valign=top>79. </td> <td valign=top>Stalin, Joseph </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>12. </td> <td valign=top>Freud, Sigmund </td> <td valign=top>46. </td> <td valign=top>Machiavelli, Niccolo </td> <td valign=top>80. </td> <td valign=top>Elizabeth I </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>13. </td> <td valign=top>Pasteur, Louis </td> <td valign=top>47. </td> <td valign=top>Babbage, Charles </td> <td valign=top>81. </td> <td valign=top>Mandela, Nelson </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>14. </td> <td valign=top>Edison, Thomas </td> <td valign=top>48. </td> <td valign=top>Wollstonecraft, Mary </td> <td valign=top>82. </td> <td valign=top>Bohr, Neils </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>15. </td> <td valign=top>Jefferson, Thomas </td> <td valign=top>49. </td> <td valign=top>Gorbachev, Mikhail </td> <td valign=top>83. </td> <td valign=top>Peter the Great of Russia </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>16. </td> <td valign=top>Hitler, Adolf </td> <td valign=top>50. </td> <td valign=top>Sanger, Margaret </td> <td valign=top>84. </td> <td valign=top>Marconi, Guglielmo </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>17. </td> <td valign=top>Gandhi, Mahatma </td> <td valign=top>51. </td> <td valign=top>Jenner, Edward </td> <td valign=top>85. </td> <td valign=top>Reagan, Ronald </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>18. </td> <td valign=top>Locke, John </td> <td valign=top>52. </td> <td valign=top>Churchill, Winston </td> <td valign=top>86. </td> <td valign=top>Joyce, James </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>19. </td> <td valign=top>Michelangelo </td> <td valign=top>53. </td> <td valign=top>Curie, Marie </td> <td valign=top>87. </td> <td valign=top>Carson, Rachel </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>20. </td> <td valign=top>Smith, Adam </td> <td valign=top>54. </td> <td valign=top>Polo, Marco </td> <td valign=top>88. </td> <td valign=top>Oppenheimer, Robert J. </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>21. </td> <td valign=top>Washington, George </td> <td valign=top>55. </td> <td valign=top>Magellan, Ferdinand </td> <td valign=top>89. </td> <td valign=top>Anthony, Susan B. </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>22. </td> <td valign=top>Khan, Genghis </td> <td valign=top>56. </td> <td valign=top>Stanton, Elizabeth </td> <td valign=top>90. </td> <td valign=top>Daguerre, Louis </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>23. </td> <td valign=top>Lincoln, Abraham </td> <td valign=top>57. </td> <td valign=top>Presley, Elvis </td> <td valign=top>91. </td> <td valign=top>Spielberg, Steven </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>24. </td> <td valign=top>Aquinas, St. Thomas </td> <td valign=top>58. </td> <td valign=top>Joan of Arc </td> <td valign=top>92. </td> <td valign=top>Nightingale, Florence </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>25. </td> <td valign=top>Watt, James </td> <td valign=top>59. </td> <td valign=top>Kant, Immanuel </td> <td valign=top>93. </td> <td valign=top>Roosevelt, Eleanor </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>26. </td> <td valign=top>Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus </td> <td valign=top>60. </td> <td valign=top>Roosevelt, Franklin D. </td> <td valign=top>94. </td> <td valign=top>Patient Zero </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>27. </td> <td valign=top>Bonaparte, Napolean </td> <td valign=top>61. </td> <td valign=top>Faraday, Michael </td> <td valign=top>95. </td> <td valign=top>Chaplin, Charlie </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>28. </td> <td valign=top>Bach, Johann Sebastian </td> <td valign=top>62. </td> <td valign=top>Disney, Walt </td> <td valign=top>96. </td> <td valign=top>Caruso, Enrico </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>29. </td> <td valign=top>Ford, Henry </td> <td valign=top>63. </td> <td valign=top>Austen, Jane </td> <td valign=top>97. </td> <td valign=top>Salk, Jonas </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>30. </td> <td valign=top>Beethoven, Ludwig Von </td> <td valign=top>64. </td> <td valign=top>Picasso, Pablo </td> <td valign=top>98. </td> <td valign=top>Armstrong, Louis </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>31. </td> <td valign=top>Watson &amp; Crick </td> <td valign=top>65. </td> <td valign=top>Heisenberg, Werner </td> <td valign=top>99. </td> <td valign=top>Da Gama, Vasco </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>32. </td> <td valign=top>Descartes, Rene </td> <td valign=top>66. </td> <td valign=top>Griffith, D.W. </td> <td valign=top>100. </td> <td valign=top>Suleiman I </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>33. </td> <td valign=top>King, Martin Luther Jr. </td> <td valign=top>67. </td> <td valign=top>Zworykin, Vladimir </td> <td valign=top> </td> <td valign=top> </td></tr> <tr> <td valign=top>34. </td> <td valign=top>Rousseau, Jean-Jacques </td> <td valign=top>68. </td> <td valign=top>Franklin, Benjamin </td> <td valign=top> </td> <td valign=top> </td></tr> <tr> <td colspan=6> Choosing the most influential people of the last 1,000 years was an ambitious undertaking. A&amp;E polled more than 360 journalists, scholars, and political leaders and asked them to vote for the men and women who believed had done the most to shape our world today. The Network also listened to viewers who cast their ballots on the BIOGRAPHY Web site. The A&amp;E Editorial Board reviewed the results and compiled the final list. The program, hosted by BIOGRAPHY anchor Harry Smith, features commentary from an esteemed panel of experts, including Kofi Annan, Hillary Clinton, Harold Evans, Dr. Henry Kissinger, Steven Spielberg, Dr. C. Everett Koop, Itzhak Perlman, Richard Holbrooke, Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, Wendy Wasserstein and Robin Williams. </td></tr></tbody></table>
Credit: http://www.biography.com/features/millennium/
Cheers, Moffo

 

This message has been deleted due to termination of membership.

 

This message has been deleted due to termination of membership.

 

[imported_coop]

Are you seriously prepared to leave this dipshit as a member of this community?

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

Once again, if anyone wishes to see menin pornographic poses, well ill happily apologise and re-post the latest efforts of Eye

Its a g rated forum Eye, grow up a bit tiger

Moffo

 

[imported_coop]

Don't bother answering, I know the answer already.

I saw what he posted there and I won't be back.

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

Coop, apologies mate, but he can come back under 1000 different names. We cannot ban him permenantly from this site

Cheers,
Moffo

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

Coop - It was a disgusting picture and i wholeheartedly apologise to anyone who saw it. But the fact is, we can't do much about it. I for one have got better things to do than sit here all day deleting usernames, and im sure the other managers are the same

If you have a good idea, please let us know

Cheers,
Moffo