5 Debunked Tech Inventions That Changed The World

Video script and citations:

Get my achieve energy security with solar guide:

Follow-up podcast:

👋 Support Undecided on Patreon!

⚙️ Gear & Products I Like
Tesla and smart home gear:

Undecided Amazon store front:



Abstract Ocean Tesla Accessories:
15% Discount - Code: "Undecided"

Jeda Tesla Wireless Charger/USB Hub:

Tesla Referral Code:
Get 1,000 free supercharging miles
or a discount on Tesla Solar & Powerwalls

Visit my Energysage Portal:
Research solar panels and get quotes for free!

And find heat pump installers near you:

Or find community solar near you:

👉 Follow Me
X

Instagram

Facebook

Website

📺 YouTube Tools I Recommend
Audio file(s) provided by Epidemic Sound

TubeBuddy

VidIQ

I may earn a small commission for my endorsement or recommendation to products or services linked above, but I wouldn't put them here if I didn't like them. Your purchase helps support the channel and the videos I produce. Thank you.

[ketsuekikumori]

You should've save this for April 1st. Would've really messed with some heads

[Mekuso]

It's equally easy to write down a list of overhyped technologies that turned out to be actual scams or at least didn't work out. That's just how it is. Many of the individual technologies presented on this channel will never work out, but that doesn't technology is stagnating, it's the exact opposite.

[GreatDiver]

guaranteed: the 1st hominid to figure out how to make fire was the first hominid to be burned for witchcraft.

[williampezzner]

Hi Matt! I really like your show. I work in communications tech and one of the jokes that we say is that there are a lot of wires in wireless communication.

[jamesc.]

I remember my boss in 1995 laughing at the internet, saying how can you make money with that. He is out of business now. ;O)

[saltpeter]

People inherently resist change. People also do not like to be proven wrong. These people are called conservatives.

[wstavis]

I dislike the overuse, and misuse, of the term "debunked". It is generally used in place of the proper word, "disputed". Another use of the term is "disagreement". When anyone says something is " debunked" it is often a key clue that you should investigate a bit more deeply.

[FriendlyNeighborhoodNitpicker]

In 2021 I predicted that Matt Ferrell could never find all the puns… 🤭🤬

[bigianh]

It wasn't just that for the Wright Brothers because one of their main competitors was a director of the Smithsonian it took 50 years before that institution acknowledged their achievement one of the reasons the Wright Flyer was originally exhibited at the Science Museum in London rather than the Smithsonian

[Blaxjax]

I developed one statement to accept tech. "If man can dream it Mankind will build it."

[matthewsharp]

I think it would be cool for someone to make a video from the point of view of someone living in an alternate reality where DC won the current war. The video would be set in current day, and would be talking about the benefits and downsides of AC, as if it were a new technology, the benefit of this video would be to show people what it looks like to watch a video about a "new technology" while also knowing that the new technology is good. I think the video could have the same feel as a video taking about things like liquid metal batteries or some crazy new technology we have today, But instead it's talking about technology we already know about very well, from the perspective of someone who is just hearing about it

[HyenaEmpyema]

I liked this video, but want to clarify that there's an important distinction between debunking and valid criticism:

Solar panels are awesome, but they should have the number of megawatts/kilowatts used to produce them printed on the panel. If the panel has a lifetime output of, idk, 80mwh, but it took 95mwh to produce (from a country that uses dirty coal) and ship across the ocean (on a ship running on bunker oil), you aren't saving the environment anything. I know most panels do produce more power than it took to make them, but its important that their production power be subtracted from this number so there's truth in labelling.

If you buy a Tesla but trade in your Toyota for a few thousand $, that gas-guzzling former-car of yours is *still* burning gasoline just like it did when you owned it. Don't kid yourself otherwise. But now how many mwh of (possibly dirty) energy did it take to build you that Tesla? I think EV's are great and should ultimately replace ICE vehicles, but in many instances you're not "saving" anything by consuming more. I think you (Matt) should go into deeper discussion about this and about the resistance to accept criticism that not all "green" technologies actually live up to their claim.

[TheVoidSinger]

We see the past as an unchanging logical and linear progression; "of course that was going to happen that way"
We see the present as stable peak of advancement; "this is how things are"
but the future? it's full of choices and uncertainty, and we forget just how quickly little things add up, or how difficult it is to see which way the path will turn... but it has always been that way, and it always will be.

[borisquince]

You forgot a big one, Einstein's assertion/thinking that nuclear fission was impossible and a waste of research time. He later wrote a letter to the YS government to start research after thinking the Germans had done the impossible.

[caldodge]

A big reason for the skepticism regarding solar, electric cars, etc., is because government subsidies hide the actual costs, and politically motivated people hide the negative points, like people who trumpet the "cost" of generating power, but leave out the cost of generating power when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine, or the negative environmental impact of handling old solar panels and windmills when they no longer work.
When measured by cost per minimum energy generated, the cost of solar and wind is infinite (x/0). And the people who trumpet energy storage typically ignore the amount actually required, or the inefficiencies of storage (example: the efficiency of iron batteries is around 50%, so solar would need 3x the daily generation power to provide power at night from that battery technology).

[JDrwal]

Nuclear man. Nuclear.
There is little energy in renewables.
Thorium, fusion - that’s the future.

[vova]

Looking in the past is easy. What about a future technology that is currently seen as a pipe dream by scientific establishment? Any good guesses?

[Voltaic_Fire]

Ah Tesla, he should have been a much bigger name than Edison, who largely brain farmed better scientists.

[penumbraman]

When televisions came out, my grandpa said televisions won’t amount to anything.

[Duds]

This is kind of funny, I know people that think if they bend an electric cord too much that the flow of electricity will stop.
I think the bigger problem is people don't understand how the things around them work, physics laws, material physics etc.