I kinda thought using the first vaccine and the most current vaccine in my explanation would infer that I am aware of the difference

The question is meant to be more conceptually overarching and abstract

If the innovation is the airplane then it doesn’t matter if it’s an old timey biplane or or a next generation stealth fighter

If the the innovation is the vaccine then it doesn’t matter if it’s a smallpox vaccine or an mRNA vaccine

It doesn’t seem like you’re understanding what I’m saying much at all.

By your definition everything is innovative

Maybe that in of itself is the problem here, equating the words innovative and invention.

Try replacing innovative with groundbreaking or original perhaps

But saying that advent of aviation and automobiles is just bikes and trains with wings or more wheels kinda goes to prove a lack of arguing in good faith here

I am also thankful that my children were born in this era as well

There has been significant progress in the treatment of cystic fibrosis

Still not the kind of innovation I am talking about

I don’t see very many humans naturally flapping their arms flying around very often

There was that one guy, but I’d say it was more falling with style than flying

… and he didn’t stick the landing

I also disagree

Your reply in of itself is a fallacy

An airplane relying upon improvements engine and material design does not negate the very real revelation of human flight to the world

Nor does your oversimplified and ultimately incorrect explanation steam engines and evolution of horse drawn vehicles

Especially considering the first automobiles were steam powered

It completely misses the point

The horseless carriage itself was the innovation

I apologize for not explaining the question more thoroughly

I am talking about innovation in a fully realized concept

I always thought that flying cars would be the next major leap in innovation, but it’s still in its fledgling stages

Not the definition I am referring to

• introducing new ideas; original and creative in thinking.

Conceptually, improving upon something isn’t entirely original

It can be hard to grasp. We can’t imagine what life and the mindset of people were before a concept existed because we have always had it.

Yes, we can imagine the difficulty of travel before the invention of aircraft

But it’s hard for us to understand the profound difference to life and everyone’s worldview at the time

People fantasized about human flight for what seemed like forever to them, so long that it became a fantasy that many believed would never be realized

Then suddenly it was

What have we experienced collectively since the 80s that is like that?

Yes, we’ve certainly progressed in nearly every field

But are they truly innovative or are they a natural evolution of something that already existed?

I agree, they most certainly did say mRNA

I recall having vaccines in the 80s, probably what saved me from polio

Same could be said about everything we have though couldn’t it?

Cars, aircraft, boats… All improved significantly…

But is any of it truly innovative?

Because it was Obama so it has to be bad

That’s as far as the rationale goes

Reagan was evil, but he subtly evil. He got off on getting his agenda across just with charm. He’d be flipping out about how overtly evil today’s malefactors are operating

The bull in a china shop approach is only going to provoke backlash

Reagan would not approve

Even Reagan would be like

Reagan hates everyone in this picture

Sure as hell did when I worked there

We should probably get out before they close the borders for us too

I’m American and I’d rather buy Canadian too

Just pay your 50% federal sales tax on everything

Is equating the defense of Ukraine with that hat the entire point of the meme?