Prev: «   |   Next: »

72 Responses

← Previous Page 2 of 2
  1. Robert Hillan
    Robert Hillan at |

    #4 is completely false, the science and engineering behind the us space program is not only known, but also practiced. to think the engineers built a rocket that took man to the moon, and that they never knew how it worked is ignorant

    Reply
  2. karen patrick
    karen patrick at |

    The title of this video is “10 Lost Technologies”, so why are a number of things in this video not technologies (like Atlantis) or not lost (either because we know how they worked, like Damascus Steel and the Antikythera Mechanism, or because they’re mythical with no basis in fact, like Atlantis and Vimanas)??

    Reply
  3. 100 ml e liquid
    100 ml e liquid at |

    GOOD.

    Reply
  4. Gun Trust Texas
    Gun Trust Texas at |

    I wouldn’t dispute that the reputation of the Stradivarius violins is overrated – it’s hard to imagine how it wouldn’t be. But that study doesn’t preclude the assertion that the Stradivarius violins were at least somewhat better than other violins of its time or even of those made relatively recently. That’s where the unusually dense wood – a byproduct of the particular time and place in which it was made – might be a factor.

    Reply
  5. Mark Boisvert
    Mark Boisvert at |

    Nice article, but not one mention of Nikola Tesla? Really?

    Reply
  6. rahul
    rahul at |

    yeah and what about the ancient indian technology to produce rust free iron???

    Reply
  7. vinu sharma
    vinu sharma at |

    Is it only about the technologies of Europe ….why there is no mention of the great asian technologies?? and by the way mentioning the greek fire as no. 1 make no sence cause it was used only for distructive purposes or so

    Reply
    1. TopTenz Master
      TopTenz Master at |

      We are often accused of being biased to the USA, this is our first complaint about being biased towards Europe. I guess this means we are offending more people than ever. 😉

      Reply
  8. E
    E at |

    What? No mention of Tesla’s technology?

    Reply
  9. Julianna
    Julianna at |

    Only partial truth on the NASA loss of schematics and other documents surrounding the Apollo and Gemini programs. A HUGE number of documents and hand drawn schematics still existed into at least the late 1970s, but the contractor companies were having to pay to store them – I mean store huge rooms full of documents (ie, very expensive). They kept asking NASA to either move the docs somewhere or foot the bill for their storage, and NASA didn’t. Eventually they told NASA they were going to destroy them all by a particular date if nothing was done, and nothing was done, so they were destroyed. Yes, really. Dad was really ticked when they did they – everybody at Marshall Space Flight Center (and presumably the other centers as well) knew about it, but nobody had budget to convert it all to microfilm nor space to keep the originals, so they were trashed. Sad, eh?

    Reply
  10. Doni ALBO
    Doni ALBO at |

    Of all top ten i rate of all the Alexandria library cause it contained majority of this in his rich archives, so major of all loses is Alexandria library which many of early civilizations vanished together with its records.

    Reply
  11. CL Palmer
    CL Palmer at |

    Monster beat, what evidence do you have for this hypothesis? Moreover, what the hell does it have to do with anything in this article? If I had to guess, Khomeini was afraid of what Reagan would do and thought Carter was a wimp (right on both counts). Qadafi had to learn the hard way.

    I agree that many of the items on this list do not qualify as technology, but are nonetheless interesting.

    Michael, why do you lead in with the Germ Theory of Disease when you know as well as I do neither Palin nor any of her contemporaries deny it. I suppose you mean to make her look ridiculous, and thus equate that with questioning evolution. Questioning gravity? Sorry, never happened. I think you sandwiched evolution in there to give it greater credibility than it deserves. I have no religious objection to evolution per se, but there are just too many holes in it for me to be comfortable endorsing it as accurate. Just having an understanding of all of the changes happening on a nigh-constant basis to the classification system makes me wary of assuming relationships between organisms, alive or extinct. Assuming that any fossil (or tiny fragment of a fossil) that in any way resembles something primate is an ancestor of Man is statistically ridiculous, even if you assume evolutionary theory to be accurate. Both gravity and germs can be observed and verified under laboratory conditions. Interspecies evolution cannot. All species change a bit from generation to generation; I’m a little taller than my dad. Still, they don’t change into new species. As for sub-species, those are known as breeds or races. Yes, there are many races of men. Insisting that this is evolutionary in nature implies that some might be more advanced than others, which is how many racists justify their hatred. If, after all, sub-species become new species, and we ascended from simpler into more complex lifeforms, we assume that further evolution is an advancement. Since evolutionary scientists claim that the human species originated in Africa and that the other races evolved as groups left Africa, it would imply that Africans are less evolved. This, in my view, is racism. I cannot endorse it.

    Reply
  12. monster beat
    monster beat at |

    Let us not forget that Reagan’s future vp (Bush) and cia chief (Casey) met with the Ayatolla Khomeini behind the back of the then-current Carter administration (treason) and arranged for Iran to keep the American hostages until after the election. In return Iran got, at the very least, a conduit thru which to illegally receive missiles and other armaments–which came to light when traitor Ollie North got busted taking the missile $$$ and giving it to friends in Central America who turned out, naturally enough, to be drug smugglers USA-bound. Ah, the good old days…

    Reply
  13. Crystal
    Crystal at |

    Silphium (or Laserpicium, sometimes just called laser) did not go extinct or was not revered primarily because of it’s use as an abortifacient (in fact, the only mention of its use in this manner was by Pliny). It was used in medicine but more often it was used as the main spice in cooking. It was highly prized by top cooks and the wealthy demanded it to season their meals. The oldest known cookbook, titled Apicius after Marcus Gavius Apicius, uses laser in the majority of its recipes.

    It became very expensive because it was over-farmed and they were unable to cultivate it. Caesar Nero is rumored to have eaten the last known sprig of laser.

    Today the resin asfoetida is considered to have the closest taste to that of laser.

    Reply
  14. Realitypod
    Realitypod at |

    All the old technologies are interested to see and it was very bad that some of them are lost now-a-days. Especially the library of Alexandria.

    Reply
  15. Arnum
    Arnum at |

    Thanks for the good read. What are some of the plants that are related to Silphium?

    Reply
  16. Gemfyre
    Gemfyre at |

    Another interesting “lost technology” is the cure for Scurvy. This article about it is fascinating – http://idlewords.com/2010/03/scott_and_scurvy.htm

    Reply
  17. Gareth
    Gareth at |

    I once saw an interesting blind test of violins. Several experts were blindfolded and listened to a group of violins and asked to identify which was the strad. Not one of them got it right.

    Reply
  18. Michael
    Michael at |

    It’s “hypothesis” not “theory”.

    Why is that important? It’s important when the Palin crowd wants to dismiss the Germ Theory of Disease, The Theory of Evolution, The Theory of Universal Gravitation, etc. by saying “But it’s just a theory”.

    Reply
  19. Jim
    Jim at |
    Reply
  20. Bill
    Bill at |

    I know I’m a little late in posting a response to this great list, so it will probably never be read, never-the-less I have to say this: Nepenthe is Marijuana, case closed.

    Reply
    1. Josean
      Josean at |

      DUUUUUUUUUDE You just found that technology. LOL hiding in our own ashtrays.

      Reply
  21. alex
    alex at |

    I read up on damascus steel somewhere that back in those days the blades were so strong because certain molecules in the smoke in what they were burning to forge the metal were weaved in to the blade. The guy who discovered this actually just got a Nobel prize

    Reply
    1. Andrew
      Andrew at |

      All it was was carbon and occasionally they got naturally formed carbon nanotubes in it. It’s called carburizing and is still a common heat treat process for lower carbon steels. It was the way they did it more than anything else that made it better.

      Reply
  22. happster
    happster at |

    a little research on damascus steel will show you that shotguns were made from it in the early 1800s into the 1900s.Shotgun shell boxes of modern ammo used to have warnings on them not to use in damascus barrels because they were inferior steel and may explode.Not hardly the fine steel your article claims.

    Reply
    1. FMH
      FMH at |

      Nice, I just wanted to write the same thing. In my hunting class they still had some damascener stell guns to show us how they looked so we would know not to use them anymore.

      Reply
    2. Andrew
      Andrew at |

      Damascus even today more typically refers to layered steel created for aesthetics. They are two different things.

      Reply
    3. Andrew
      Andrew at |

      Damascus steel only works well when used in the right way, for swords. Not for looks, as in the shotguns. The layers have to be perpendicular to the force applied, and the flexibility in the other direction makes it more resistant to breakage.

      If not maintained, it could oxidize between the layers and weaken, causing the shotgun to fail.

      Reply

Leave a Reply