[cop359]

The whole war = innovation thing never held much water for me.

First of all, there is no way to know what would have happened if there was no war. Some of those things might have been invented anyway. Maybe other more important things would have been invented.

Also, if you look at non-war years they too are full of innovation. The period just before WW1 brought us the light bulb, the telegraph, the phone, skyscrapers, the type writer, etc. etc. I mean, it was over a slightly longer period of time, but I don't think it would be outrageous to argue that the rate of innovation was just as high as during WW2.

[vacri]

Well, that's an entirely fair way of looking at it. Pshaw! A few years of war held less innovation than a hundred!

A working telegraph over 8 miles was invented in 1816.

typewriter 1829

telephone 1876

light bulb 1879

skyscrapers ~1890ish... but preceeded by buildings with similar number of stories from Roman times!

Yes, you're quite right. A hundred years (two thousand, if you include Roman precedent) does indeed hold more innovation than four.

And if you characterise ~98 years ('period just before WWI' with examples, 1816-1914) as 'slightly longer than WW2', which came in at 6 years (5 in earnest, 4 if you're American), perhaps you should pursue a career in archaeology, paleontology, or politics...