Slashdot Mirror


The Worst Jobs in Science: The Sequel

flyingtoaster writes "For the second year in a row, Popular Science published their annual countdown of the worst jobs in science. This year's list includes Anal-Wart Researcher, Iraqi Archaeologist and Landfill Monitor. And you think your job's bad?" We also linked to last year's list.

336 comments

  1. Where is? by ericdano · · Score: 4, Funny
    Where is the Slashdot author? Or the Cowboyneal feeder? Or the Slashdot Moderator? Or the Slashdot story submitter?

    Those sound like bad jobs to me ;-)

    --
    It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
    I moderate therefore I rule!
    --
    1. Re:Where is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      As well as:
      Slashdot Troll
      Slashdot Karma Whore
      Slashdot First Poster
      Slashdot Repeat Poll Offender
      Slashdot Whiner
      Slashdot Linux Advocate
      Slashdot Devil's Advocate (supports either Microsoft or Bush)
      Slashdot Joker That Brings A Slashdot Joke Into Every Post And Is Still Modded Up
      Slashdotter Who Mods Others Up

    2. Re:Where is? by Sepper · · Score: 2

      Well, they DID mention Computer Help-Desk Tech

      --
      I live in Soviet Canuckistan you insensitive clod!
    3. Re:Where is? by jm91509 · · Score: 5, Funny
      Where is the Slashdot author? Or the Cowboyneal feeder? Or the Slashdot Moderator? Or the Slashdot story submitter?



      It said the worst jobs in science. Nothing scientific about this place...

    4. Re:Where is? by Andreas(R) · · Score: 1

      Or the Slashdot Moderator?

      What about the Meta-Moderators?

    5. Re:Where is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot Troll

      No, we get tons of credit on trolltalk. In fact, I argue this is one of the best jobs in science!

    6. Re:Where is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trolls are artists, not scientific people.

    7. Re:Where is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, its a science. We even have a peer-reviewed journal!

    8. Re:Where is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Or the Cowboyneal feeder?

      It's called a manger...

    9. Re:Where is? by ericdano · · Score: 1, Funny

      Oh, yes, the Meta-Moderators.....poor souls. Right down there with the dung herders...

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    10. Re:Where is? by fbform · · Score: 2, Funny



      Did you see this link at the bottom of the main article? How bad would the job of that contraption's test-pilot be?

      --
      Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
    11. Re:Where is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Where I work we've had 4 help desk techs kill themselves in the last week. It's starting to worry me...

    12. Re:Where is? by Robber+Baron · · Score: 1

      Where is the Slashdot author? Or the Cowboyneal feeder? Or the Slashdot Moderator? Or the Slashdot story submitter?

      These have nothing to do with science at all...they're more like religious customs or observances.

      --

      You're using her as bait, Master!

    13. Re:Where is? by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, the /. dupe-checker job can't be that bad. Appearently you can screw up repeatedly and not get fired :-)

    14. Re:Where is? by ekmo · · Score: 1
      Where is the Slashdot author? Or the Cowboyneal feeder? Or the Slashdot Moderator? Or the Slashdot story submitter?
      It said the worst jobs in science. Nothing scientific about this place...
      If "Slashdot Moderator" or "Slashdot story submitter" is your job, then you're in trouble.
      --

      | Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
    15. Re:Where is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Must be a Windows help desk.

  2. Age? by nitrocloud · · Score: 0

    This article is quite old.

    --
    Karma: Good, or bust!
  3. EA Researcher by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 5, Funny

    Odd, "EA Researcher" was nowhere to be found. Oh that's right, they don't have any. They're just an assembly line now.

    --

    In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    1. Re:EA Researcher by IO+ERROR · · Score: 1
      Don't hate them because they're inscrutable. These are people who love the subtle power and intricacies of computers, yet who must spend their days incarcerated in windowless rooms telephonically holding the hands of 16-bit blockheads. One computer tech in Delaware recently had an urban legend spring to life when a user called to complain, apparently in all sincerity, that his computer's "coffee cup holder" (actually the CD drive) was broken. "We should all be issued sidearms so we can vent our frustration," she says. It's a lot to swallow for $35,000 a year. No matter--these jobs won't last long in the U.S.; they're being offshored to India in mega-numbers. RTFM indeed.

      This is indeed one of the worst jobs I've ever had the displeasure of having. Though if I HAD been making $35,000, it would have been a LOT more tolerable.

      --
      How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
    2. Re:EA Researcher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work the internal help desk for our small company (among other duties, we have a really small IT department). Some days can be just fine - little or no problems, simple solutions to the few calls that happen, etc. leaving me plenty of time to tackle other, interesting projects in need of my attention.

      Other days feel like they're never going to end with incredibly stupid problems

      "Oh my god! My computer is broken! The screen is all black!"
      "Is your monitor on?"
      "Yes!"
      "Are you sure? The little light on the front is on?"
      "Yup."
      "Okay, ill be over in a few."
      *i walk across the building to her desk*
      *i push power button on monitor, it clicks on, everything is fine*
      "Oh. Thanks!"

      Also, am I the only one who's noticed that out of a couple hundred users, a select few are guranteed to call every day, while some call almost never, even though they do the exact same job?

    3. Re:EA Researcher by DrJonesAC2 · · Score: 0

      $35,000 a year??? For tech support?!?!?

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

      That has to be the funniest damn thing I have heard all day.

      Honestly they don't pay more than $10 an hour around here.

  4. what about... by BortQ · · Score: 5, Funny
    - Programmer for EA

    Computer scientist is a scientist, no?

    --

    A Multiplayer Strategy Game for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux
    1. Re:what about... by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      LOL.
      Thats just what i thought "ah, a dupe from the NYtimes EA story... wait, its something else"...

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    2. Re:what about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, according to most MBA's a 'Computer Scientist' is a coolie, somewhat more useful than a janitor --in fact you can replace a janitor with one--. Too bad you just can't get all of you garbage outsourced to India, then you would have no need of a 'Computer Scientist'. If you want any computer work done, go hire an MCSE. You never ever hear them mutter on about bad design, never complain about Microsoft or the long overtime hours, and don't mind as much when you oursource as their training time and effort is much less. Enjoy!

    3. Re:what about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Computer scientist is a scientist, no?

      Nope. Anything named 'science' isn't.

      Sciences: 'physics', 'chemistry', 'geology', 'biology', 'medicine' etc.

      Non-Sciences: 'computer science', 'social science', 'scientology', 'science fiction'

    4. Re:what about... by chialea · · Score: 1

      >Nope. Anything named 'science' isn't.

      It depends on what part of computer science you're talking about. By and large theorists, cryptographers, and type theorists are slightly more practical mathemeticians.

      However, systems researchers are doing something far closer to science than I. They take a complex system and attempt to model and study it, so that they can improve it. They run experiments and get data with weird noise and signals they don't expect. The system may be man-made, but it's still a complex system, whose behavour is sufficiently unpredictable so as to require a deductive approach.

      (At least this is what the systems people tell me when I ask them to explain to me why what they're doing is research, when to me it looks like making software.)

      Lea

  5. Tampon Squeezer by Temporal+Outcast · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ewww!

    #4 is Tampon Squeezer

    On the other hand, Tampon Tester would rate as one of the best jobs ever.

    *sigh*

    Sorry if I grossed someone out.

    --

    Vote for a Man, Vote for Bush!
    Not a liberatarian flipflop hippie.
    1. Re:Tampon Squeezer by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      Sorry if I grossed someone out.

      Actually, you did gross me out, but it was with your sig. By the way, what is a "liberatarian?"

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    2. Re:Tampon Squeezer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you mean Taster?

    3. Re:Tampon Squeezer by pacoworld · · Score: 1

      Why do you have to squeez a Tampon??

    4. Re:Tampon Squeezer by kfg · · Score: 2, Funny

      On the other hand, Tampon Tester would rate as one of the best jobs ever.

      If you say so buddy. Drop 'em and bend over.

      KFG

    5. Re:Tampon Squeezer by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 4, Funny
      On the other hand, Tampon Tester would rate as one of the best jobs ever.

      Nope. Tried it. They taste terrible.

      --
      --- Ban humanity.
    6. Re:Tampon Squeezer by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      RTFA? Because the scientist's job is to study vaginal infections. The Tampon holds in the liquids very well, and squeezing it releases the fluids...

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    7. Re:Tampon Squeezer by sysadmn · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why, free tampons?
      Perhaps you meant in vivo CONDOM tester. Big difference...

      --
      Envy my 5 digit Slashdot User ID!
    8. Re:Tampon Squeezer by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Um, RTFA, the tampon squeezers are actually looking for STDs, unless The Clap really helps you get your rocks off......

    9. Re:Tampon Squeezer by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1
      Nope. Tried it. They taste terrible.

      Try a little whipped cream next time. It takes a little getting used to, but a job's a job, man.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    10. Re:Tampon Squeezer by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      I agree, they also leave you with a bad case of cotton mouth.

    11. Re:Tampon Squeezer by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 3, Funny

      When life gives you tampons, make tampon-ade.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    12. Re:Tampon Squeezer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grow up.

    13. Re:Tampon Squeezer by flynniec6 · · Score: 1

      And they really make your mouth dry.

  6. So What by cr0y · · Score: 1, Funny

    At the landfill I monitor we have these Valves that releases this totally putrid smelling Steam. Even with all the funk, people flock to our landfill more than anyone elses!

    --

    ItWasFree.com - Take the mystery
    1. Re:So What by SYSS+Mouse · · Score: 1

      Not me, I am not getting some radioactive (er.. addicting) stuff with a Half-Life of 2 days that make me motion sick

  7. Career most applicable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
  8. Anal wart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The bright side? "In 13 years I've only been pooped on twice, and that's not bad." :-|

    I love my job.

    1. Re:Anal wart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope he didn't get any on his powerbook....

    2. Re:Anal wart by johansalk · · Score: 1

      When I was in junior surgical training, my senior got pooped on by an old lady as he examined her.

  9. Go Helpdesk! by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure, you aren't killing puppies for science, but you do spend all day listening to people demanding that you fix their problems like it's your fault. You're usually rated by call time, so actually helping people looks bad on you review.

    --
    "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    1. Re:Go Helpdesk! by DogDude · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Like the article says, don't worry... you won't be employed for long.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:Go Helpdesk! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you do get time to post on /.

    3. Re:Go Helpdesk! by jim_v2000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am pleased to see that computer help desk is on the same list with tampon squeezing. I used to work for Symantec's consumer tech support call center, and let me tell you, that sucked. For those of you who don't know, Symantec charges 30 bucks per call to their tech support. This made what would normally be a frustrating job into a hellish nightmare of tech support. Every cust who calls is is already pissed off because they KNOW it's your fault that their ancient computer won't get on the net anymore after installing Norton Personal Firewall (they usually click on "block" when it pops up asking if they want to let iexplore.exe or aol.exe access the net)...and it makes them livid when they have to pay to get it to work. I spent countless hours of frustration explaining that if they didn't want to pay for help, they could look at their manual, or the website. And the call time/scripting/fee policies that we techs had to put up with were absurd. There were days I went home feeling physically sick after a day of one pissed cust after another. Given a choice between that job and tampon squeezing...it would be a tossup.

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
    4. Re:Go Helpdesk! by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      I reckon the IT administrator job has to be even worse than helpdesk. Sure, the helpdesk has to put up with clueless lusers who couldn't find their Asus with both hands. However, the IT administrator has to put up with management. IT administrators are required to pull off miracles with no budget, no staff, and lots of unpaid overtime. And if anything does go wrong (which, thanks to Finagle's Law, it will), then they not only did something wrong, but they are almost never given the resources or authority to do anything about it.

      With helpdesk, at least you don't have to do the politics. You just play the gig.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    5. Re:Go Helpdesk! by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      Boy am I glad I worked a good helpdesk. I worked for two years for 20 hours a week at a medium-sized university helpdesk. I liked the job, frankly. Sure, there was a neverending stream of dunderheads, dolts and downright dunces, not to mention an *incredibly* bureaucratic IT staff... But we all need something to complain about. People with PhDs who need to ask "how do I get to Google... on a Mac?" among others. And underpaid- yay for $8.50/hr! But I've seen much worse jobs...

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    6. Re:Go Helpdesk! by ripbruger · · Score: 1
      I'm working at my University's helpdesk, and honestly, compared to the other jobs there, it ain't that bad. Sure it pays about $33,000 a year, and I'm kept busy but I have a few pluses going on there.
      1. It's a small school that I finished from recently, and I worked there part time as a student, so I know how the whole place works.
      2. I work an 8 hour day. That's it, no overtime, or require overtime. At the end of the day, I go home, and I don't worry about work. Not a lot of IT jobs that let you get away with that nowadays.
      I guess the job is also different in that it's such a small campus, that I can make an appointment to go to someone's office and fix something, rather than do the entire thing on the phone (which I have done before while working for an ISP, and is generally more frustrating). I'd have to agree with someone else's post that says the IT manager has the toughest job. I don't think ours has had any freetime in a while (including during vacation).
      --
      I can't spell ripburger
    7. Re:Go Helpdesk! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      I am pleased to see that computer help desk is on the same list with tampon squeezing.
      They both involving dealing with cunts.
  10. WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Don't forget Iragi Weapons Inspector?

    The jobs not done until you find at least one.

    1. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, as we discussed earlier, the guy who'se hired to picks up the animal corpses here

    2. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget Ira[q]i Weapons Inspector?

      I think it just requires a good sense of humor

    3. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      WMD's have already been found, idiot.

    4. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      mod parent up so we can all laugh at him.

    5. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lets see ... American soldiers have been attacked with them. But, we're hating america this year, so that's not in the news.

    6. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lets see ... American soldiers have been attacked with them. But, we're hating america this year, so that's not in the news.

      What were they, then? Nuclear? Biological? Chemical?

    7. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dynamite is a WMD? Every country has some, let's go invade Canada! Come on, the US let the insurgents have the dynamite, what did we hear about al-Qaaqaa?

    8. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A sarin filled shell was rigged up as a roadside bomb. It was detonated like any other roadside bomb, so the sarin didn't cause any harm. AFAIK that's the only time one has been used in an attack.

    9. Re:WMD by mark2003 · · Score: 1

      Please find a link to this new information - the only incident I have heard of regarded a bomb dating back to the Iran-Iraq war (when Iraq was a US ally) and caused two people to be treated for exposure http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/37222 55.stm.

      Hardly a weapon of mass disrution is it?

    10. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many millions are reported dead?

    11. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put up or shut up. Do you really think that if a WMD attack had occurred Dubya would not trumpet the event every day?

    12. Re:WMD by spook+brat · · Score: 1

      I was in Baghdad when it happened, cut the guy some slack. It was in the January-April timeframe of this year, though.

      And, no, no-one was treated for exposure. The poeple who set up the charge forgot (or perhaps weren't informed? that sarin degrades almost instantly when heated - the detonator they attached it to cooked it off the moment it was triggered. If I rememer right, the reason we knew it was sarin was that the residue was consistent with sarin decompositon byproducts.

      I'm just glad that the insurgents aren't better shots, they might actually become a threat.

      --
      Travel the Galaxy! Meet fascinating life forms... ...and kill them - http://schlockmercenary.com
    13. Re:WMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the other guy pointed out the bomb was rigged wrong for use with sarin. If used properly (ie, at some sort of crowded public event) it could have killed many people, especially if it was portioned out into smaller packages and spread out.

      The fact that it didn't do any damage was only due to their incompetence with sarin.

  11. MS Director of Truth: www.fudfactory.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about "Managing Director of Truth" at the Fud Factory dept. at Microsoft?

    Laugh (it's Funny) - or if you can't take a joke: www.fudfactory.com

    Cheers,
    Mick

    1. Re:MS Director of Truth: www.fudfactory.com by arose · · Score: 2, Funny

      What about SCO programers?

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    2. Re:MS Director of Truth: www.fudfactory.com by mlrtime · · Score: 1


      nonexistent jobs do not count...

  12. Not as bad as my job... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Food taster for Fear Factor...

    1. Re:Not as bad as my job... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who said we taste them :-) !!.

    2. Re:Not as bad as my job... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No problem. They all taste like chicken anyway.

  13. Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by Temporal+Outcast · · Score: 3, Insightful


    The cradle of civilization and agriculture. The first place humans built cities. The birthplace of writing. And--oh, yeah--currently the best place in the world to get yourself kidnapped or killed. For archaeologists, there's no plum like Iraq. Saddam actually let them do their job, and he even protected his country's heritage in museums. But now no archaeologist can work in Iraq until security improves. Meanwhile more than 8,500 treasures have been stolen, and those are just from museums, where artifacts are cataloged.

    What truly troubles archaeologists is imagining what's being taken from their dig sites in the field. Archaeologist Francis Deblauwe, who is trying to keep tabs on the looting, knows of more than 30 important digs, including ancient Babylon, that have been despoiled, but he notes that his list is "very preliminary and grossly incomplete." When the researchers do get to go back in, they'll be able to determine which sites have been looted. But they'll never know what's been taken.


    Sheesh! And I wonder how many such 'casualities' of war we ignore. Really sad.

    War is not just people, it's a whole lot more. And as an amateur archaeologist, I really do feel bad. And these things are irreplaceable.

    --

    Vote for a Man, Vote for Bush!
    Not a liberatarian flipflop hippie.
    1. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Umm...

      Sheesh! And I wonder how many such 'casualities' of war we ignore. Really sad.



      Followed by the sig:

      Vote for a Man, Vote for Bush!
      Not a liberatarian flipflop hippie.

    2. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It is a tragedy indeed. You have to remember that the Iraqis brought this upon themselves too especially many of the ones residing in the US and the Shiite. Mad men as GW and Blair are expected to behave this way.

      Historically, people who use the aid of a foreign power (the US in this case) to have their way in their country suffer the consequences.

      When talking to an Iraqi, I asked him why didn't that senior officer in Saddam's Guard (whom he knew personally) kill Saddam. His answer was that the officer's family, relatives and even village will be tossed into acid. Well this is the alternative price! They got a bunch of mercenaries who do not respect any human rights laws or international treaties running havoc in their country; 100,000 civilians dead and counting.

    3. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sarcasm?

    4. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think the possibilty of looting archeological sites rates highly on the list of 'reasons not to enforce ceasefire agreement'. You also might consider there are several sites that will never be archeological finds because those mass graves have beem found.

    5. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by cold+fjord · · Score: 5, Informative

      Things are a litte more complex than that little blurb in the article suggests. Saddam's interest in archaeology tended to be self-serving, such has when Saddam rebuilt Babylon:
      In 1982, Saddam's workers began reconstructing Babylon's most imposing building, the 600-room palace of King Nebuchadnezzar II. Archaeologists were horrified. Many said that to rebuild on top of ancient artifacts does not preserve history, but disfigures it. The original bricks, which rise two or three feet from the ground, bear ancient inscriptions praising Nebuchadnezzar. Above these, Saddam Hussein's workers laid more than 60-million sand-colored bricks inscribed with the words, "In the era of Saddam Hussein, protector of Iraq, who rebuilt civilization and rebuilt Babylon." The new bricks began to crack after only ten years.

      The problems in Iraq aren't new. Many of the problems in Iraq date back to at least Saddams invasion of Kuwait and the 1991 Gulf War.
      Prior to the Persian Gulf War, archaeologists working in Iraq were forced to close down excavations when Iraq's August invasion of Kuwait made the situation to dangerous to continue....

      And following the war, looting of archaeological sites increased dramatically as Iraq's impoverished citizens used sometimes desperate means to make money in light of the economic sanctions placed on Iraq by the western world.

      Saddam's military made a practice of stationing military units by antiquities to protect them from attack. There are many recorded instances, including these gems:
      ...In early February 1991, for example, Saddam parked MiG fighter jets at a Babylonian ziggurat at Ur to deter coalition forces from disabling them during the Gulf War. By Nineveh, the ancient capital of the Assyrian empire, he built air bases and weapons factories. According to archaeological scholars from the University of Chicago, an 80-foot mound containing many ruins of ancient Nineveh also housed an oil storage tank. During the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam used the site for anti-aircraft batteries because it was the most elevated spot in the area....

      In contrast, at the height of the bombing campaign the Pentagon produced aerial photographs of the Al-Basrah mosque. They showed clearly that the Iraqis had destroyed the mosque for propaganda purposes. While coalition forces had bombed a target some 100 yards away, leaving the mosque unscathed, Iraqi engineers sliced off the dome in the hope of duping journalists that the U.S. had been responsible for the destruction.

      The desecrations of burial grounds in Iraq aren't anything new. They happened to burial groundsafter the first Gulf War too.

      The looting of the museums was also overstated as well.

      FWIW: In Afghanistan, the Taliban was destroying priceless cultural artifiacts as being anti-Islamic. The US intervention in Afghanistan stopped that, and the new government is committed to preserving such artifacts.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    6. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are an idiot. You search for the MINOR and less important news to justify the illegal war and the atrocities against the Iraqi civilians.

    7. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You retard. Did you even read the gp post?

      Fuck off, idiot.

    8. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by Jay+Carlson · · Score: 2, Funny

      What is not clear from the above is just how much Saddam's Disneyfied Babylon looks like Live Action Doom.

      No, I'm serious.

      The Doom graphics engine needs an upgrade to properly render the historic site.

      Also, Kuwait looks like a fucking Counter-Strike level with all those crates.

    9. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

      Totally off topic, pure hilarity !

      --
      music lover since 1969
    10. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    11. Re:Consequences of Bush's Iraq War by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      Babylon looks more like it is straight out of Serious Sam.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
  14. Television Meteorologist by wretched22 · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure I understand why that is one of the worst jobs in science. Reading the article, it seems they were just being belittled and TV weather-forcasting called a "fast-food science."

    I'd still do it for a paycheck.

    1. Re:Television Meteorologist by rifftide · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They should have said "weather desk staffer" at a TV station.... the one who takes the calls after the "great weekend" doesn't materialize. Agree that the on-camera job is actually a pretty good one, and it's in the entertainment industry, not science.

    2. Re:Television Meteorologist by mikael · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not sure I understand why that is one of the worst jobs in science. Reading the article, it seems they were just being belittled and TV weather-forcasting called a "fast-food science."

      It's no different from being a high-tech fortune-teller. Your crystal ball is replaced by a supercomputer running weather simulations. Your predictions are only as good as the output results. Read up on the "Great Storm of 1987" and Michael Fish, who reassured a concerned view that there was no danger of a severe storm coming ashore (which obligingly decided to change course).

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    3. Re:Television Meteorologist by sailforsingapore · · Score: 1

      To say nothing of the incredible lack of dignity being a meteorologist among "weathermen" as some are.

    4. Re:Television Meteorologist by sailforsingapore · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine is looking to go into meteorology...he told me that there are two course paths offered by most colleges with progrmas: a BA and a BS. I always thought it was rather telling. Apparently the BA program gets about 4 times the applicants of the BS.

    5. Re:Television Meteorologist by connorbd · · Score: 1

      If you want a decent weather forecast, get a book on basic weather and go to the National Weather Service website (www.weather.gov) or get a weather radio. At least the NWS isn't beholden to ratings.

    6. Re:Television Meteorologist by mikael · · Score: 1

      Even worse is the phrase "weather bunnies" when referring to the attractive single women employed to keep the ratings up for the weather reports in local small-town TV stations.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    7. Re:Television Meteorologist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      e.g. Los Angeles Channel 9; yikes.

    8. Re:Television Meteorologist by bakkajin · · Score: 1

      Or you could go to http://twister.sbs.ohio-state.edu/. That is where I used to get my weather data when I used to set up the weather computer for the newscast.

    9. Re:Television Meteorologist by Tiram · · Score: 2, Informative

      On NRK, one of our national TV channels (Norway), the weather is actually presented by real meteorologists, usually seniors from the Meteorologic Institute, which means it's mostly men well into their forties or more. They are definitively not weather bunnies:)

      --
      The knuckles, the horrible knuckles!
      (I'm a girl, you know)
  15. Even the anal-wart researcher looks down onSomeone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The anal-incontinence researcher.

  16. Science teacher? by jdhutchins · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I was shocked to see "public school science teacher" on their list. They used a poor example, and yes, that would be a bad job. But there are many good science teachers, and most schools are better than the one they picked out. The article also implies that public-school science teachers are all poor teachers, which is not true. I was shocked to see that (I'm a high school student), and I'm sure many other slashdotters are too.

    1. Re:Science teacher? by Noksagt · · Score: 1
      But there are many good science teachers, and most schools are better than the one they picked out. The article also implies that public-school science teachers are all poor teachers, which is not true.
      I didn't see any criticism of science teachers being "poor teachers," except in the sense that you should feel sorry for them because they have to put up with inadequate funding.

      While most public schools probably don't need to have English teachers teach science, it is true that many are under-funded & the No Child Left Behind Act favors other classes over science.
    2. Re:Science teacher? by Zackbass · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It doesn't matter if you are the best teacher ever to walk the earth, most public schools will have wonder why you waste your time there within months of your first day. No matter how much money the science department gets it can't make a student give a damn. Not only do you have depressing students, but then you have to deal with the school administration when you the parents of the pothead that got a 30 on his chem final call and raise hell.

      The opposite is true too. If you have a bunch of interested students you can put together a great class with very few supplies.

      Science teacher absolutely deserves to be on the list as long as a large part of our society still sees no value in education.

      --
      You gotta find first gear in your giant robot car
    3. Re:Science teacher? by Suburbanpride · · Score: 4, Insightful
      My dad taught science in public high schools for 25 years before quiting. In the last school he worked at, the football team got new uniforms every year, but he was forced to by lab equipment out of his own pocket. He gave a damn about the students, but unfortently he did not have the the support of the administration.

      If america is going to maintain a competive edge in the world, we have to get kids excited abotu science. There are lots of great universities out there, but what happens when kids come out of high school hating science beacuse they had bad teachers?

      --
      sorry 'bout the mess...
    4. Re:Science teacher? by i_like_pi57 · · Score: 1

      They may be good teachers, but without funding they can't really do anything. i came from a small town where that occurred. 'tis not very nice. you're lucky to come from a school with suitable funding. not nearly enough of us have that luxury though.

    5. Re:Science teacher? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad your dad was not an English teacher...

  17. Bush on "science" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    What about President Bush's Science Advisor? If that job did drive you to drink nothing would.

    1. Re:Bush on "science" by tsunamifirestorm · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well they have a Congressional Science Fellow listed on there if you RTFA (or RTF Magazine). In both jobs most of your efforts will go to waste, but I'm sure if you were the President's Advisor, I'm sure you'd at least be paid better.

    2. Re:Bush on "science" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can't exist so it can't be bad...

    3. Re:Bush on "science" by jtnishi · · Score: 1
      What about President Bush's Science Advisor? If that job did drive you to drink nothing would.

      Try Bush's speech coach.

  18. Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by BrookHarty · · Score: 4, Informative

    Anyone find it funny the most common job on there is Nursing? The nursing role has changed from working with patients to Medical Assistants. They hire 10-15 MA's to 1 Nurse in most clinics. And then to top it off, they dont pay the Nurses for the years in school, and hard work, and they get no respect for managing the MA's ontop of normal nurses duties.

    What a shame.

    In our Internet-based summons for readers to top (bottom?) last year's "Worst Jobs" list, nurses nominated themselves in droves: "Still a no-respect profession. Doctors treat you like slaves." "The pay is substandard for all the training." "Just look at the current shortage." Indeed, the government estimates that we're short 110,000 nurses, and that by 2008 we'll need half a million more.

    Numerous studies echo the dissatisfaction of our nurse readers. Nurses are fleeing the profession because of stress, long hours, low pay and lack of advancement opportunities. The cost? A recent University of Pennsylvania study found that surgical patients at hospitals with the worst nurse-staffing levels (ergo the most overworked nurses) have a 31 percent greater chance of dying. If this trend doesn't improve, we might soon find "patient" topping our list.


    1. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Interesting... nurses have only in the last 10 years felt so neglected. This at a time when their salary/hourly wage is at an all time high. Most nurses are earning upwards of $36-53K (national average of LPN-RN with many in the $60's especially RN's with a couple year's experience or specialized). Many nurses can sit for their boards straight after only 2 years of training, not bad pay for 2 years. Their career path is not limited to being LPN/RN's. If they're not satisfied with providing direct patient care, they can go further into becoming midwives (with pay in the $45-70K range), Nurse Practioners (pay in the $70-100K range) or obtaining their PhD's in nursing and going the teaching route (pay's not great, but more respect from peers). So, in summary, they don't have excessive training requirements; however, they enjoy good pay by most people's definition, job security, no limitation to geography, broad career paths (up and lateral).

      If there's disrespect among mid and upper-level providers (MD's and other staff) toward nurses perhaps it's because of a lack of understanding of each other's tasks / responsibilities / liabilities / time demands. While it's true that nurses have a very tough job for 8-12 hours/day, other providers also have difficult jobs.

      As to nurses "fleeing" the profession, I'm surprised as there are numerous articles describing the flock of women and men TO the nursing profession and the 2-year wait to be accepted into many nursing schools.

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    2. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Lareya · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just to clarify, all those "other" nursing specialized cares does mean more than 2 year grad. If you want management, or nurse practitioner, you MUST have a higher degree. Minimally masters. Also, the nurse practitioner don't make much more money than floor nursing. The only nurse that actually makes a lot more money are the nurse anesthetists. Also, the required call also makes nurses make more money, but it is more than a 40 hour week.

      And, yes I am a nurse.

      --
      Zaurus SL-C860 Girl, linux newbie
    3. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Trillan · · Score: 1

      I don't find it especially sad, because I know it doesn't really belong on the list. The job that does? Nurse's aide. There's no job so bad that the person's subordinate doesn't have it worse. There, you not only have to deal with incompetent doctors, but also incompetent and lazy nurses as your superior instead of your coworker.

    4. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 3, Informative
      And, yes I am a nurse.

      Then thank you for the job you do.

      The "other" nursing specialties do require more training and that's part of their career path (like everyone else). Primary Care Nurse Practioners make on national average $69K. I dated a NP for 7 years (she was a "floor RN" for four of those years), she now makes $85K and a friend of hers is a NP for a hospital specialty department and makes $100K. The friend has no call and the former gf gets paid extra for each weekend she works ($1500 for Fri to Sun--double that if it's a holiday). The median salary for a CRNA is $118K.

      Unlike many 9-5 jobs (or 7-3), many jobs in the medical profession are not 40-hour weeks. Many are much more (especially if you count call nights/weekends). When I was a resident, an 80-hour week was considered short (this was of course before resident hour limitations initiated in New York).

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    5. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldnt put to much faith in salary.com According to them I should be making aprox $43,000.00 when in fact I am making less than half that. I am sure that some of their salary quotes are correct but some of them are obviously way off.

    6. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Lareya · · Score: 1

      I agree, my point was in pointing out the career path. It will take more than 2 years of education to do that. On a personal note, I work in surgery and worked 10+ years in a teaching institution. I would NEVER recommend medicine (especially surgery specialties) to anyone!. I felt like I saw the MD's and residence more than their wifes or SO's. I felt sorry for a lot of them, and would bring in food and snacks for them. Now, with the insurance companies being the way they are, I feel the doctors are underpayed and undervalued. Lareya

      --
      Zaurus SL-C860 Girl, linux newbie
    7. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by orangepeel · · Score: 1

      Off-topic but, any opinion on 1-year "accelerated" nursing programs?

      --
      Whoever designed level 61 in Frozen Bubble is a sadistic bastard.
    8. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's quite obvious from your nick and your comments that you are an MD from a very urban location.

      Do you ever leave the city? I'm curious because if you did spend any time in a small or rural hospital you would have a *very* different perspective of the nursing profession. I dare say you'd have a crystal clear picture of why they are leaving. Piss poor compensation, exponentially expanding job demands, condescending and frighteningly incompetent doctors, micro management by administration and insurance providers... it goes on and on.

      btw... my wife has been an ER nurse for over 20 years in a tiny (22 bed) rural hospital. Not all hospitals have a wing specializing in every medical disorder to shuffle patients off to. Specialization sounds sexy if reality actually worked that way. To insinuate changing jobs for those who likely have more insight into a patients condition than the attending doctor is offensive and disturbing.

      Like most nurses my wife became one to take care of patients.... not to become a lazy doctors' coach or an administrative paper pusher. All of which are uncompensated duties which take away from helping patients get well.

    9. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      A recent University of Pennsylvania study found that surgical patients at hospitals with the worst nurse-staffing levels (ergo the most overworked nurses) have a 31 percent greater chance of dying

      31 greater chance of dying? Everyone dies unless nurses have found an imortality serum, so what do they mean here really?

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    10. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 1
      I am sure that some of their salary quotes are correct but some of them are obviously way off.

      Of course you're right, that's why I listed median salaries and not the high/low salaries given at the extreme percentiles in their charts. I listed that site only as one source of support rather than just pulling numbers out of thin air or providing no basis altogether (hey, this is /. and no one would just make up numbers).

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    11. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by hrvatska · · Score: 2, Informative

      The big crisis in nursing is going to come in 5 to 10 years. There's a significant bubble of nurses in the 45 to 55 year age range who will be retiring. This retirement bubble, in conjunction with the aging US population, will likely lead to an even larger nursing shortage in the next decade.

      My wife has been an RN for nearly 30 years, and has experience nursing in 5 states and 8 hospitals. She obtained her BS degree in nursing in 1975. She's worked in a range of hospitals. From advanced medical centers to small rural hospitals. Everything I know about nursing I learned from listening to her and her fellow nurses vent over the years. From my wife's perspective, nursing is a lot more stressful now than it used to be. A lot of this has to do with the increase in administrivia that RNs have to attend to. Some of it is driven by the legal climate surrounding health care in the US. I'm a software engineer, and I wonder how many of my colleagues would be willing to stay in the profession if they could be sued and prosecuted for decisions on the job. Especially when those decisions involve snap decisions in sudden and critical situations.

      Aside from the original degree and license exam, my wife is required to periodically re-take and pass an extensive exam in her specialty. She is required to have a minimum amount of education every year. She has to be educated on all the new medications she administers. Like any other profession that deals with advanced technology, regular education is critical to staying competent.

      The federal and state governments may want to consider taking steps to reduce the size of the shortage. Here are some possibilities.

      • Help colleges increase the number of available slots in nursing schools, especially community colleges. Associate degree nurses are every bit as qualified as BS degree nurses for the day-to-day things that most RNs have to do. They have to pass the same exams after school to get their licenses, and most Associate degree programs give just as much hands on training as BS degree programs. BS degree programs tend to be heavier on the theory side of nursing. This stuff is okay if you're going to be going into administration, but really doesn't matter much on the job. My wife's perception is that Associate degree nurses are more likely to be willing to 'get their hands dirty' from day one. Periodically, there's talk of requiring RNs to obtain BS degrees in order to be licensed as RNs. Bad idea. I suspect this gets pushed by advanced degree nurses who never spent much time on the floor nursing, having spent the majority of their careers in the hospital and state bureaucracies. These would be the PHBs of nursing and health care.
      • College loan deferment or forgiveness programs aimed at nursing students.
      • Better pay for nursing aides. One of the real hassles for RNs is the high turnover rate for aides. It's even higher than the turnover rate for RNs. This is in large part due to the abysmal pay of aides. Higher pay would attract better people, and act as an incentive for them to stay in their jobs. Good aides make a nurses job a lot easier. New and inexperienced aides require more attention from RNs, which leaves less time for the skilled tasks that the RN should be spending time on. Good aides frequently decide to go into nursing, so attracting more qualified and motivated people could help in more ways than one.
      • Help hospitals implement better IT systems. A good hospital IT system reduces the amount of time RNs have to spend doing paperwork, and increases the amount of time they spend with patients. It also indirectly reduces medication and other errors.
      • Medicare and medicaid are one of the largest funding channels for hospitals. Perhaps paying a higher rate to hospitals that meet certain minimum staffing criteria would encourage hospitals to find and implement creative solutions to recruit and retain nurses. I think better staffing would lead to better care, which would in turn lead to be
    12. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My understanding of the problem from all the nurses that I've talked to (lots, I used to train them on a security system that my company built) is that there aren't enough people to be nurses, and the reason there aren't enough people is because schools for the most part can't afford to hire many nurses qualified to teach. A manager of a unit in a hospital can often make six figures, and doesn't necessarily want to give that up to teach. There is high competition for nursing schools, and long lines to get in, but not enough teachers to train the people that would reduce their workloads (and possibly their pay.)

    13. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think those numbers are even close to what Washington state pays. Group Health was paying 12USD/Hour for MA's, 18USD/Hour for Nurses and 29USD/Hour for Docters. Now you might say thats not bad, but Journeymen plumbers/plaster/etc make around 35 an hour.

      So no, I dont even trust your Median salaries. You really need to be marked troll as those wages are not even close to realistic.

    14. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I'm out of the hiring part of medicine. I wasn't even aware there were 1-year programs. Seems like it would limit future career advancement.

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    15. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 1
      I don't think those numbers are even close to what Washington state pays. Group Health was paying 12USD/Hour for MA's, 18USD/Hour for Nurses and 29USD/Hour for Docters.

      Well, if you clicked on any of the links in my reply, you'd see they were not MY numbers, but rather the median numbers of one of the largest salary survey sites on the internet. This doesn't necessarily determine accuracy, but it gives a basis to the numbers I cited; that is, they're not my numbers but rather numbers reported by someone else. They happen to coincide with clinic payrolls and the salaries of nurses I know personally. So mark me troll if you like, but I'm only reporting published numbers that anyone can look up for themselves. And for what it's worth, $12/hour for an MA is good (more than twice minimum wage), $18/hour matches up with what I mentioned before ($18/hour ~ $36K/year, so thank you for confirming what I wrote earlier). A physician salary of $29/hour would be about the lowest in the country being roughly $58K/year. That's just about what residents (they're barely physicians) make.

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    16. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 1

      I'm sure their numbers may be way off for many folks, that's the downside to looking at charts which reflect aggregate numbers. Even seeing a range of salaries doesn't help much other than giving someone a rough idea of what the going salary "might" be for a career or geographic region.

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    17. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read over parent's posts and see nothing to suggest a troll. Looks like the person was trying to be helpful and I went to the web site and looked over the data and he or she reporte3d it correctly. I looked at Washington State and it is the same as your numbers for licensed practical nurses (which parent als stated correctly). If anyone is a trool it's you. I looked at doctor pay and it was at least 132,930 in Washington.

    18. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Erythros · · Score: 0, Troll

      As the saying goes "If you could walk a mile in my shoes".
      Interesting that you should comment on a subject which you know little about.

      You are correct to state that nurses make a decent salary based on the numbers you have posted, being "2 years of training". You must realize that these two year degrees you speak of is only after 1-2 years of pre-requisites of college science and psychology, with bachelor programs being more intense and including theory and management skills, much harder than you could imagine.
      Your analysis of the nursing shortage is flawed because while you are correct to mention the Problem of "Fleeing" nurses, you balance it with the problem of difficult entrance to nursing schools. For one, many students never actually finish their studies after they realize what they have gotten themselves into. The other problem is this "fleeing" problem is rampant and the number of graduates cannot supplement the supply of RNs leaving. Many RNs leave the profession entirely after only 2-3 years or less and many others go right into their Nurse Practitioner Studies to get out of the bullshit that exists on the unit.

      I agree with the person who posted the problems with the profession including lack of IT support to ease the paperwork burden on RNs.

      I also agree with the comment indicating the pittance of a salary that a Nurse's Aide receives to do their "shitty" job. There is a serious shortage of good Nurse's Aides to do much of the unskilled care that is often required. Have you ever tried to care for just one ill person??? Now multiply this by 8 or 10 and intesify their illness and needs threefold.

      As you may have guessed I am an RN, and yes I have left the profession for the reasons listed above. I am currently self-employed in a sales position and much happier and a hell of a lot less stressed. My reasons for leaving were not financial. When I first graduated and worked in a cardiac unit my thoughts were, "I should have become a stock Broker, it would be less stressful. I'd rather lose someones millions than someone's mother. By the time I left the profession I was making more than many Nurse Practitioners, whom you indicated to be making 70K - 100K. There are many problems plaguing the nursing profession. Good nurses need to be respected for their knowledge, experience, caring, and willingness to put up with everyone else's families.

    19. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 1
      I agree completely. The shortage of teachers is not limited to nursing, there's a shortage of teachers in so many fields. Teaching nurses (Nurse Educators) are beginning to earn more due to the shortage of teachers and demand for nurses.

      Here's another site that gives nursing salaries: Slightly lower (about 10%) than the site I reported earlier. It gives a breakdown by setting and training level.

      To be fair, I don't believe it's so much of a salary issue with nurse burnout as it is a workload and safety issue. Now, those are two huge areas of concern that very few people could rationally argue against. But /. is not the appropriate forum.

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    20. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 1
      Interesting that you should comment on a subject which you know little about. ... much harder than you could imagine...

      And interesting that you feel like an authority on what I know. While I may not be a nurse, I am in the medical field and have had more than ample occasion to review and discuss nurse/support staff salaries with individual nurses, unions and management. It may not be apparent, but I am a nurse/patient advocate. Nurses on the medsurg floors where I've had patients take care of 4-6 patients (typically, sometimes less, never more) and each "team" is assigned a nurse's aide. In my particular specialty, nurses do 1:1 support (rarely 1:2) through most of their shift. I am one of the physicians who support workload based on acuity rather than patient number (though there seems to be no "agreement" on how to determine acuity and complicating things further, the ability to cope with a given acuity is determined in part on a nurse's experience and charge nurse). In clinic, it's one nurse per provider and she has no phone/triage responsibility (though she does room, obtain vitals and print off labs).

      [you]...mention the Problem of "Fleeing" nurses, you balance it with the problem of difficult entrance to nursing schools...

      I never meant to make any statement regarding a balance between the nursing shortage or nurses "fleeing" with the difficulty of getting into nursing school. At some point, hopefully, the shortage will lessen because we draw more people into nursing and retain those already there. My statement simply meant that people aren't being frightened out of pursuing a nursing career.

      However, this isn't supposed to be a discussion of nurses nor of medical issues, it has simply progressed to that based on some statements in this sub-thread regarding some of the good things I saw about nursing careers--I believe there are many good things about nursing careers (decent salaries, career path, demand and open geography). In another reply I mentioned a few issues regarding nurse burnout and that for most who choose to leave the nursing profession, it probably didn't involve money but rather workload and patient safety.

      I'm not an authority on nursing requirements nationwide and I don't believe I ever suggested otherwise. I'm sure you realize that nurses are not required to have a BS degree, and many LPN's do not. RN's are also not always required to have college degrees prior to starting nursing school. There are many "2+2" and "3+2" programs out there. The salaries I listed in my original post were not my numbers but from two freely reviewable unconnected websites. They happened to be in agreement with numbers supplied to me by one of the unions here (a large metropolitan area) so I considered them reasonably accurate... of course there will be areas and individuals significantly higher and lower. One of the disagreeing/chastising replies I saw quoted $18/hour which is also in agreement with the salary I mentioned. But again, that was not intended to be the main point of my original post.

      I have left the profession for the reasons listed above. I am currently self-employed in a sales position and much happier and a hell of a lot less stressed.

      I'm genuinely happy you found a career that's less stressful and makes you happy (I've often thought the same thing); hopefully, you're not too dissociated from the medical profession and you're able to make use of your medical training.

      When /. does their "worst job" survey, I can think of several jobs worse than nursing (MA/orderly/janitor in a nursing home comes to mind--those people have to be saints).

      Many RNs leave the profession entirely after only 2-3 years or less and many others go right into their Nurse Practitioner Studies to get out of the bullshit that exists on the unit.

      Of course this is

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    21. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 1
      Do you ever leave the city? I'm curious because if you did spend any time in a small or rural hospital you would have a *very* different perspective of the nursing profession.

      I grew up in a small Texas town (pop. ~800) and was an orderly at the 20-something bed hospital during my senior high-school year. This was years ago, but I do know something of the environment. In addition to my normal clinic/hospital, I've also worked in a couple small clinics/hospitals in a couple of small towns in a neighboring state.

      Piss poor compensation,

      I've mentioned other places that workload and safety issues are more likely the reason nurses leave their profession, not compensation--which many would agree is at least decent (meaning that more money wouldn't make the job less stressful or safer).

      exponentially expanding job demands

      I've been known to exaggerate too, but "exponentially"? Certainly with more documentation requirements and more patients per nurse, the job demands increase; however, this is not a phenomenon unique to the nursing staff. Other providers (MD, NP's, PA's, CNM's) are all seeing more patients/day with ever-growing documentation requirements.

      condescending and frighteningly incompetent doctors

      Sadly, I know this is all too prevalent, however, it's not limited to physicians. I've seen a number of incompetent people in many other fields.

      micro management by administration and insurance providers...

      ...and with today's litigious society, no one in the medical field is immune to "micro management"

      To insinuate changing jobs for those who likely have more insight into a patients condition than the attending doctor is offensive and disturbing.

      I'm not quite sure where this came from so I'm uncertain how to respond.

      not to become a lazy doctors' coach or an administrative paper pusher

      Again, I'm not sure what the first part of that means, but believe me, the paper pushing is spread pretty heavily at all levels and is the result of:

      conveying pertinent patient status history to another provider

      documenting to cover one's backside (defensive documentation) in the event something bad happens and the unfortunate, inevitable finger pointing starts

      documenting to "prove" to the insurance company/payor that diagnostic testing/procedures that were billed for were actually done

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    22. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THis is all a load of crap. I'm sorry - but it's about time someone got to the heart of it. I currently work as a resident in a large metropolitan hospital. I have had the opportunity to discuss all these issues that people here are talking about. Let me give you guys some REAL numbers.

      A medical resident who has spent 4 years in college + 4 years in medical school starts off earning $50K. This is for 80 hours/week (we used to make less for up to 120+hours/week). On top of that, we do not get paid extra for the hours over 40 (or over 80). If we work nights, we don't get paid extra. We just get that base and that's all. We always carry our pagers and have to respond - nights and weekends - and no, we don't get paid extra, we work on holidays - and no, again, we don't get paid time and a half. Our licenses are on the line. If someone dies, the physician gets sued - even if the nurse forgot (or decided that she just didn't want to) give some particular drug or do some intervention that was ordered. (This has happened - that's why I write it...

      Now, to a nurse. A nurse goes to school for at least 2 up to 4-5 years and then instantaneously starts making $60K BASE. At our hospital, nurses work a total of 13 shifts a month, each 12 hours long. If that nurse works on Sundays, they get an extra "time-and-a-half pay." If they work nights, they get "night differentials." For every course, etc that they take, they get an "educational differential" or a "professional differential..." On top of that, they frequently coordinate so as to "call in sick" - even though they're not - because they just don't feel like they want to come in. And they get away with it. Then they proceed to complain that there's a shortage of nurses that day when their collegues decided to take off so that they can play hookie and go out with their boyfriend/girlfriend. Their professional licenses are not on the line. On top of that, for the most part, their union backs them up - the worst nurses in the hospital have the cushiest jobs! They can never get fired, and have the BEST benefits ever. It's common for nurses to make $90-100+K/year working just the minimum...

      Give me a break. Nurses are paid adequately for their jobs. Hell, I've even done their jobs when one of them was on the phone the entire day to her divorcing husband while my patient was dying in the ICU. She was too busy. Give me a break. Another one, was giving another resident a bj and some other "treatment" while she was on-duty and her patient proceeded to have a major catasrophe happen. Yeah, poor, poor nurses. They do it to themselves. I don't feel ANY bit of remorse for them. Not one bit.

    23. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by catstack · · Score: 1

      The parent has no clue what he's talking about. My wife was a hospital nurse until she "fleed" nursing when our first child was born. Nurses are overworked. A typical shift is nominally 7am - 7pm, but usually lasts at least an hour longer. (Got to finish the paperwork.) Did I mention no breaks for lunch or dinner?

      Staffing levels suck. It's not uncommon to have 1 nurse to 10 patients. That isn't supposed to happen, but it is commonplace. My wife was very frustrated by the level of care that she was able to provide her patients. When she first started nursing, life was much better. She had the time to actually talk to her patients, get to know them, make sure they were as comfortable as possible, etc... In other words, be a good nurse. With the shortage that now exists, there is simply no time for anything but the bare minimium.

      How about the hazardous working conditions. One of my wife's coworker contracted TB (while she was pregnant) from a patient. Sometimes, it is not immediately clear who's carrying dangerous diseases. Speaking of which, I think all patients should be tested for blood-borne pathogens like Hepatitis and HIV. Nurses are exposed to patient's blood all the time. Accidental needle sticks, bleeding IV sites, oozing wounds, patients vomitting blood onto nurses (yes, that happened to another coworker while she was checking for lung sounds). Unfortunately, patient confidentiality overrides a nurse's right to know what she's dealing with. I know you're supposed to use universal precautions with all patients, but if you know that little old lady acquired HIV through a blood transfusion you will certainly be more careful around her.

      Changing career paths isn't quite so simple either. My wife wanted to become a lactation consult, however that requires an additional two years of schooling plus several thousand hours of experience in the area. This would have required a detour to working in a labor and delivery floor for a couple years before trying to become an LC.

      My wife worked on a Respiratory floor, an old person's zone. Basically, you see a patient off and on for a couple years before they die. It can be rather depressing never having long-term good outcomes. By the way, nurses are the ones that have to break the news to the family. Doctor's typically don't see that 10 year old girl crying because her nana just passed away.

      I'm a software developer & make over 3 times what my wife earned. Frankly, that's just screwed up. Software development is a well-compensated walk in the park in comparsion.

    24. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Lareya · · Score: 1

      The problem with your statement, horrifying as it is, is that you are probably unaware that you are not dealing with nurses. That the nurse you are trying to "get help" from, are probably NOT nurses but LVN's, or CNA's or other form of what the hospitals like to call "nurses" I currently work in the surgery department, and it really bugs me that the techs (altho they are good), are always calle nurses, both in documentation and addresses. When it is nurses week, they share in the "nurses" week activities. Now, I don't really care about anything, except that when the techs have NO medical background, except a 18 month schooling of handing out instruments. Now they think they are nurses. Doctors get confused cuz they start talking drugs or pathology, and they are cluess. Guess what? The doctors wonder why nurses are so "uneducated". I too am passionate about this. Hospitals hate that you wear a name tag that shows not only your name, but your credentials. I have heard of patients complaining that her "nurse" didn't take good care of her or understand what she needed, only to come and find that it was a housekeeper. Please, and the hospitals refuses to think that this is a problem! Okay, there are bad nurses, and unions can protect them. I have seen that also. But not to talk tit for tat, I have worked with some really clueless doctors also. However, I don't beleive that all doctors are bad because of the few I have worked with. Example, I worked with a eye surgeon who asked me how to run the vitrectomy machine - a Daisy. As a competent eye nurse, I was extremely nervous that a doctor who had his full training, didn't know the foot pedals. Or how about the doctor who just froze in the triple A? Again, a few bad doctors don't make the whole of them bad. I have quite a few friends as doctors, and I respect them for their education and their ability to think on their feet. But just because you think s/o was out giving someone a BJ, well, I can tell you of a lot of "unprofessional behavior" by physicians who when needed in a trauma was in a compromising position with other staff (yes, nurses, other doctors, lab clerks, etc.) That is the behavior of irresponsible people, not job classifications.

      I have been a nurse since 1987. I have worked in large hospitals and small. I too have seen the gamet.

      enough of my ramblings....
      lareya

      --
      Zaurus SL-C860 Girl, linux newbie
    25. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by MmmDee · · Score: 1
      The parent has no clue what he's talking about.

      Aww, give me a little credit. If you've read ANY of my other posts in this thread, you already know I'm a health care professional with more than a casual background in nursing issues.

      I sense you're angry and bitter, however the statements I made are correct to the best of my knowledge and experience. Yours and your wife's mileage may vary of course.

      I'll try to address some points you raised. Most nurses work an 8 hour shift, generally 7am-3pm, 3pm-11pm, or 11pm-7am. That's pretty standard, however, there are places that experiment with different hours including 4 x 10 hour or 3 x 12 hour shifts to allow nurses an extra day off while still approximating a 40-hour work week. The nurses I've known (several hundred by now) try to get their charting done by end of shift but there's usually notes, clean up, and sign-out that takes an extra 30 minutes. The hospitals and clinics where I've worked always allowed at least 30 minutes for lunch/dinner. To say otherwise would really be exaggerating or a very unusual circumstance. Federal and state law for non-salaried employees governs this.

      Staffing levels do "suck" but there's a concerted effort to reduce it. I'm not sure what part of my statement regarding the issues of workload and safety you didn't understand. I've mentioned that several times as one of the major reasons why nurses dislike their jobs. From the sounds of your story, it doesn't appear that any amount of money would have kept your wife interested in nursing (a point I've made in other posts too).

      Sadly, anyone who enters the medical profession is aware of the risk of infectious diseases. A person knows that going into the profession and it's reiterated in training and on the job over and over again. The risk is probably no higher for nurses than other providers depending on the specialty of each. As you know, for privacy reasons, patients can't currently be tested for many diseases without their knowledge and consent. This most importantly includes HIV. It would be very reassuring to know you were only taking care of healthy people (no TB, Hep C, HIV, etc), but then why would they be at the hospital or clinic? Surgeons as well as nurses and other providers, including administrative staff confront these risks daily. The standard philosophy is to treat everyone as if they have a communicable disease ("universal precautions"). Some people forget that or get sloppy or accidents simply happen. That's just life and no amount of up-front knowledge will eliminate the risk completely.

      It's too bad your wife wasn't able to pursue becoming a lactation consultant, those that I work with love their jobs. Years ago, one didn't really need any sort of credentials to be called a lactation consultant; however, these day that's changing. Along the same thought, I only mentioned the career path of nurses to point out that it's not a "dead-end job" for many who want to (and can) change their practice. I certainly DID NOT mean to imply, "If they don't like their jobs, they should change."

      As far as giving bad news, myself and most of the colleagues I know deliver the news themselves because there are the inevitable questions that nurses would simply defer anyways. So yes, I've had to tell many patients extrodinarily tragic news. In the geographic area where I practice, it's very uncommon for a nurse to give that kind of information--in fact, it's against most hospital and clinic policies here. Often times, families will coerce a nurse into being told test results.

      I'm not quite sure how/why I became the bad guy here. I simply attempted to point out some of the good aspects of nursing.

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
    26. Re:Nurse is on the list, thats really really BAD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .... /. is not the appropriate forum. I must strongly disagree! /. and other non-specialist fora are vitally necessary for these discussions. Until the (intelligent, thoughtful, educated) public is well aware of these issues there is no hope of improvement.

      I am not a medical professional but I **am** a relatively recent surgical patient.

      By the way, if you should find yourself in hospital, please consider liberal use of the words "thank you" during your stay! Thanks to Nurses and Doctors but also to people such as those who clean the room and the lab techs who come to draw blood (yes, even the ones who wake you up at 3:00 AM to stick you!). It costs you nothing -even if you're hurting- and they really appreciate it. The resulting "good vibes" are good for everybody.

      Just my 2E-8 Megabuck, but, I tried it... it works!

  19. Think those are bad? by RealProgrammer · · Score: 4, Funny
    They are. But what about:
    • Forensic proctologist
    • Leech veterinarian
    • Global warming expert at Shell
    • Corporate EMT at Philip-Morris
    • Rosanne Barr's gynecologist

    Some of those were hard just to list.

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
    1. Re:Think those are bad? by AgentPhunk · · Score: 1

      How about:

      * Goatse guy's proctologist.

    2. Re:Think those are bad? by CommanderData · · Score: 2, Funny

      How about: * Goatse guy's proctologist.

      I don't think that's proctology, it's more like spelunking.

      --
      Urge to post... fading... fading... RISING!... fading... fading... gone.
    3. Re:Think those are bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget "Bill Gates Hate-Mail Sorter."

    4. Re:Think those are bad? by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1

      Those are all so "20th Century." Get with the times, man; multitasking is all the rage now in the corporate world. You've gotta do multiple tasks simultaneously in order to stay competitive, so we better make that "Roseanne Barr's forensic proctologist." Brave new world, indeed.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    5. Re:Think those are bad? by k98sven · · Score: 1

      Forensic proctologist

      Well, I'm not sure that exists. But one which actually exists is forensic entomologist (entomology being the study of insects).

      Think about that one. Uh-huh. These are people who study the maggots in decaying corpses for a living.

      Forensic proctology sounds quite nice to me by comparison.

    6. Re:Think those are bad? by sunwukong · · Score: 1

      OT but part of that entails studying the micro environments of decaying matter to see what organisms, in what life stages and in what proportions exist at various stages of decay, i.e., given so many of such bug and its given stage in life, when was the time of death?

    7. Re:Think those are bad? by LarsWestergren · · Score: 1
      But what about:
      Global warming expert at Shell


      If you had read all the articles, you'd see there is one quite close: Congressional Science Fellow

      "It's an exercise in futility to get science across in Congress," says Raphael Sagarin, a marine ecologist who just finished his year in D.C. "The side with more power wins, not the side with the best data or the most cogent argument."

      Sagarin saw this happen on issues in his field from endangered species to global warming. Despite the din of scientific consensus on the latter, our government continues to ignore the problem. Sagarin's boss, Rep. Hilda Solis (DCA), sought to base legislation on solid science, as did many of her colleagues from across the aisle. But the committees that spawn environmental legislation--Resources, and Energy and Commerce--are chaired by Richard Pombo (RCA) and Billy Tauzin (RLA) respectively. Pombo has announced his wish to "update" the Endangered Species Act. Tauzin seems more interested in helping corporate polluters than in looking at greenhouse gas data.

      "It was so bad on this committee that they would not even pass an amendment that would have stated for the record that Congress has concerns about global warming," Sagarin recalls. "It's so highly politicized, the science just doesn't matter." Though he is now embarking on his post-doc, Sagarin feels great relief to be liberated from his government post. "I'm happy," he says, "to come back to science."
      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

    8. Re:Think those are bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about being a vet looking after bunch of animals which died in the intifada? Dr Sami Khader

  20. Grad student by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about just grad student? No matter what your research is, you're overworked, underpaid, and then thrust into a saturated job market, where you may never find a tenure track position. And if you do, you'll still be paid a far sight less than any random dick with an MBA.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Grad student by John+Hurliman · · Score: 1

      You need to go through grad school to get an MBA, so even those "random dicks" endure the same torture you do.

    2. Re:Grad student by Noksagt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Last year, they had "Post Doc," which is probably worse--you are paid almost as little and have already made the choice not to sell out to some consulting firm who would pay you large sums of money for those three letters you can place after your name.

    3. Re:Grad student by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      They're talking about JOBS. Where you get PAID. I've been a grad student - that stuff they gave me every week, there wasn't enough of that to be considered money.

    4. Re:Grad student by Hatta · · Score: 2

      I may be wrong, but I find it hard to believe that getting a masters in business and a phd in, say, physics or biochemistry, are at all comparable.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    5. Re:Grad student by darthscsi · · Score: 1

      Yea, um, sure. Have you ever gone to one of those so called "classes" future MBA's have to take? Thought not. But perhaps you would get bored of learning how to make Excel make graphs. Oh, and think about what that "M" stands for, and realized that most of the torture refered to by grad students (and by this I mean phd students, not masters students) is most apparent after they prelim or qual (depending on the school). Before that, life isn't too much worse off than for a masters student.

    6. Re:Grad student by BWJones · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh I don't know about that. It really depends upon which area you are going into. When I went to grad school (Ph.D. in neurophysiology), I had a tuition waver and I was making about $30k/year. (I think the NIH average is now around $22k) Some students in computer science make even more. On the whole however, grad students are typically underpaid, and you do work hard, but my experience has been that after I graduated, things got busier even still, because in addition to writing and doing benchwork, you have to add in travel for invited talks (provided anybody thinks your work is worth a damn), managing students, teaching, trying to find a full tenure paid position etc... because as a research fellow, while technically faculty, you still don't rank..... :-(

      All of that said, it is still one of the coolest jobs in the world to get paid to learn and discover new things. That I would not trade for any MBA position sitting at a desk managing other folks who are actually getting something tangible accomplished.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    7. Re:Grad student by Kupek · · Score: 1

      I'm a computer science graduate student at William & Mary. I make $16,000 a year. The Ph.D. students - I'm still a Master's student - make $19,000 a year. And compared to people in biology, we get paid a lot; I know someone who gets $12,000 a year.

    8. Re:Grad student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, "getting an MBA" is nowhere comparable to "being a doctoral research monkey".

    9. Re:Grad student by the+gnat · · Score: 3, Informative

      And compared to people in biology, we get paid a lot; I know someone who gets $12,000 a year.

      Ummmm. . . I'm in biology, and I get $24,500 starting out - more this semester because I'm also teaching. This is about the most any school pays, actually, but the top biology programs are all pretty comparable. For a single 20-something, it's good money, even if I took a large pay cut to go back to school. Students on external fellowships make even more: the NSF now pays upwards of $30,000 a year, and more if you teach.

      Frankly, I couldn't be happier with my position, despite the attempts of our local grad student union to convince us that we're oppressed. However, after I graduate I can either go consult (shitloads of $$, but no science or fame), work for a biotech or big pharma (good $$, okay science, probably no fame), or become a perma-postdoc (no $$, awesome science, probably no fame). I could get all three as a faculty member at a good university, but there are vastly fewer jobs available than candidates, and you have to be some combination of brilliant, extremeley focused, well-connected, and just plain lucky. I'm well-connected, but only reasonably intelligent, and I can't focus worth shit, so unless I get really lucky I'm not getting one of those jobs. Sort of depressing, but at least I like the work I'm doing.

    10. Re:Grad student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, being a grad student was great for me- once of the most productive stretches of my research career was while I was a a graduate student. Sure, I had some obligations to teach and do some grunt work, but there were not too many demands on my time and I was able to learn a great deal, had a lot of great friends and an active social life, and spent more time travelling, mountaineering and climbing than at any other time of my life...

    11. Re:Grad student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the sciences, graduate students are required to do coursework, administative work, frequently contribute to the running of a lab, and somehow find time to learn enough and be fortunate enough to get original, publishable work for a thesis. Graduate school in the professional schools like business, law and medicine has much greater emphasis on coursework and little on anything else. In some disciplines, such as math, the success rate is about 25% of the first-year graduate students finish to get a Ph.D., and only some of those write strong enough theses to have a chance a decent postdoctoral research position. In the professional schools, the fraction of students who finish is much higher and the fraction who find lucrative employment is also much higher. There is no comparison and this comes from someone who is familiar with both.

    12. Re:Grad student by the+gnat · · Score: 1

      I find it hard to believe that getting a masters in business and a phd in, say, physics or biochemistry, are at all comparable.

      They're not. MBA students take classes, they don't do research, and they graduate in 2 or 3 years. A science PhD is a minimum of 4 years and most places it's more like 6 (if you're really unlucky, even longer). On the other hand, PhD students often get to do really awesome work, and at least we get paid to go to school. I also suspect that I'd much prefer my current classmates to a bunch of future MBAs.

    13. Re:Grad student by Kupek · · Score: 1

      Then I guess your school pays a hell of a lot more than mine. Public or private? What's the cost of living like in the area?

    14. Re:Grad student by the+gnat · · Score: 1

      Public or private? What's the cost of living like in the area?

      I'm at Berkeley, which is public, but this doesn't make that much of a difference if you're a US citizen - our stipends largely come from federal training grants, which would be the same at a private university, and next year I'll be paid mostly by my boss (who gets funded by the NIH). Berkeley and Stanford (and UCSF) pay the same amount. On the other hand, my department pays tuition on top of my stipend, meaning I actually cost a lot more - but I'm subsidized by CA taxpayers, especially now that I'm an official resident.

      Cost of living is awful, of course, but since I don't have a car I'm actually saving money. There are other schools that would have been much better deals financially, but I decided not to let that be a factor in my decision. (For instance, Rockefeller is in NYC and pays a few thousand less, but they have guaranteed subsidized on-campus housing that's about half as expensive as what I get to choose from here.)

      I occasionally feel bad about the amount I'm getting paid by the government to go to school, but I work insane hours on extremely technical stuff and I'm pretty productive, so my libertarian guilt hasn't kicked in too bad yet. Besides, the equipment we use is far more expensive than us pitiful grad students.

    15. Re:Grad student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most universities have a set pay scale for student workers. The thing is they leave "wiggle room" in the scale for recompensation for experience. For example, at my university, a graduate could be hired as a TA, reader, GSR or associate-instructor. Each has a different salary (except for reader which is hourly pay) and different percentage of fees waived. So depending on what position you get (and what percentage you're hired at), you get different salary and different fee waivers. For example, I'm on the highest step of GSR that my department will hire at (which is only mid-way up the scale). It pays about 12k take home for the school year (45%) and 8k take home during the summer (100%) and has full fee waivers. So that's about 20k annually after taxes and such (about 22k before taxes). TAs make around the same during the school year, but only get a partial fee waiver. They also have to either find a GSR position in the summer or work elsewhere. I'm not positive on the associate-instructor pay scale, but I believe it's a couple of thousand more annually than GSR and TAs with a partial fee waiver. Theoretically if my department implemented the full GSR pay scale, a PhD student at the highest step would make about 34k before taxes and a masters student at the lowest step would make about 17k before taxes.

      This of course assumes they get paid around 50% during the school year (my department does only 45% so they don't have to "hassle" with vacation and sick time) and 100% in the summer. It is not uncommon for students to be hired on at less percentages (25% during the school year, 50% in the summer for example) yet still expected to work full-time. So this is part of the reason you'll hear a lot of different grad student incomes on the same campus. Trying to compare between campuses is even worse because different campus or university systems have different pay scales.

    16. Re:Grad student by Kupek · · Score: 1

      I'm funded under an NSF grant, but our department has a policy that everyone at the same level gets paid the same - so I get paid the same as other Master's students, who are normally TAs, not RAs. We get the tutition deferrment as well.

      I think it's probably a cost of living thing (Williamsburg, VA is not an expensive place to live), but it might also be a state thing as well; VA public schools are pretty tight for cash. But CS grad students here are the best paid, as I said, I know of others in the $12,000 range.

    17. Re:Grad student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You need to go through grad school to get an MBA, so even those "random dicks" endure the same torture you do."

      An MBA is grad school........those little fuckers get out in only two years......I've been in for six with no end in sight! Bwahahahahhahahahahhahahhaha!!!!!!!!!!!!
      Yeah right and MBA is fuckin' grad school. Are you somebody's bitch for 6-8 years? Are you viewed as a pair of hands sans brain? HOW FUCKING DARE YOU TRY AND EQUATE THE HORRORS OF GRAD SCHOOL WITH THE WALK IN THE FUCKING PARK OF A BLOODY M MOTHERFUCKING B DON'T DO SHIT A!?!?!?!?!

    18. Re:Grad student by grungebox · · Score: 1

      It really depends where you are. My girlfriend and I live together and are both in Grad school. I'm a nano kid at Rice, she's a grad student at Baylor College of Medicine...we each make roughly $20000 after taxes. $40k is a lot for two young people, especially in a somewhat inexpensive (albeit crappy) city like Houston. So, 40k might buy you a week's worth of used toilet paper at Berkeley, but in the not-so-expensive places it goes quite far.

    19. Re:Grad student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get an MBA and quit your bitchin', I did.

    20. Re:Grad student by InvaderXimian · · Score: 1

      If only money is your concern then perhaps you should go for being the "random dick with an MBA."

    21. Re:Grad student by John+Hurliman · · Score: 1

      They aren't comparable. A doctorate requires about two more years of school and another thesis (maybe more I haven't looked in to it in detail) than a masters degree. If you meant to say that biochemistry and physics are more difficult coursework than business, it's highly variable depending on the school you go to, the instructors you have, and what branch of each field you go in to. For example the CPA (accountant) exam is the most difficult professional exam in the U.S. with a higher failure rate than the bar exam and all other field certifications. Quantitative finance is generally regarded as a much more scientifically intense field (math and statistics) than your average genetics major. Most importantly, many physics majors would be lost in the business world and lack the interpersonal and management skills required to function. Many business majors cannot comprehend the high level math and science courses required to be proficient in physics. So trying to compare apples to oranges is actually a fruitless (sorry) endeavour.

  21. With apologies to Norm MacDonald... by AngryDill · · Score: 1


    "Quark Whore"

    --


    I'm Erwin Schrodinger and I approve of this message, and I do not approve of this message!
  22. What? No... by mtrisk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think you had it wrong - they aren't implying that public school science teachers are poor teachers! It says they have one of the worst jobs, which I believe is true. Not only do they have to teach a subject which requires intelligent thought to a disinterested student body, their profession is constantly under attack by religious radicals.

    Hell, my own mother threatened to take me out if they taught me evolution. It didn't happen, but I shudder to think of other students who did have that happen to them.

    Also, science is one of the most poorly funded departments across the nation. Hell, team sports such as Football and Soocer, even electives such as music get more funding in some areas.

    So yes, they've got one of the worst jobs in science: teaching it to the next generation.

    --

    Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
    1. Re:What? No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > Hell, my own mother threatened to take me out if they taught me evolution. It didn't happen, but I shudder to think of other students who did have that happen to them.

      This can only happen in real backwater countries and thus is culture-specific and off-topic. It's like claiming that it's bad to be an historian since then you have to praise Stalin (in Soviet Russia).

    2. Re:What? No... by vsigma · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a current public high school teacher here in the US, I can agree to a certain extent as to why the job sucks.

      however, allow me to point out that before I became a teacher - I was an engineer with a PE certification, director of R&D, with patents and what not - who got bored with what I was doing to become a teacher. And while I'm 'broke' compared to my old salary (think 75% paycut) - im a lot happier. I must also admit that I still do consulting work for my former company to keep myself financially viable, so I am still in touch with things..

      Anyway, back to the science teaching part.

      I currently teach Chemistry AP, and have consistently gotten all passing grades with my kids (scoring above a 3), and with a decent number getting 5's (around 15-17%). I have also taught in the past Physics AP (both B and C), general chem/physics and everything in between. No Biology, so I can't vouch for that area.

      Unfortunately, the general trend these days are kids that don't want to learn. Instead, with the continued cultural growth and use of IM, text messaging, video games - and in general, short attention span/immediate response 'things - the learning attention span of childern has been steadily dropping year by year.

      Now, I am not saying that all kids are like this! You still have a group that tries - just that their numbers are steadily falling.

      The bulk of the kids want to be spoon fed the information. Thinking is truely optional. I have actually had complaints that resemble this conversation:

      Student: "I don't like the way you teach."
      Me: "Alright. Let's talk about it. What can I do to make your life easier?"
      Student: "I've always been able to memorize and pass other classes - but I can't in here. Why can't your class be the same?"
      Me: "While memorizing can be a good skill to have - being able to think and process that information is more important. Ultimately, you need to be able to solve problems ON YOUR OWN - *THAT* is what is going to allow you to succeed, no matter what major or job you want to do."
      Student: "Well, I think it sucks. I want to be able to just memorize..."
      Me: "Well then, Good luck on attempting to try to pass my class - and also good luck on trying to pass your first semster at college. I am more than willing to bet that you will fail out by the end of your first semester."

      I will say that as a teacher, I am always looking for ways to teach the material in a different manner so that they'll be interested in it. However, the general trend is not looking so good.

      With the psychotic administrative types ( board of education folk who just want sheer number based success stories, and not caring about the human element of things - inane paperwork - etc ), I'll probably be forced to leave this fun profession where I feel wanted, needed and useful to my old one(I sincerely believe that you cannot pay enough to feel that way!!!!). One where i get paid 4x my current salary, do 1/4 of the work I do now- and wake up wondering WTF i am doing.

      Teaching is not an easy job. It never was, and it never can be. With the influx of people who think it *IS* an easy job - and adminstrators trying to save money - the level of science education in the US is going to sink, and fast.

    3. Re:What? No... by KUHurdler · · Score: 1

      Good post. Wish I had mod points.

      --
      Fix Your Own TV - RiddledTV.com Avoid the Landfill
    4. Re:What? No... by chrish · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately, the general trend these days are kids that don't want to learn.


      If you think that's a new trend for teen-agers, you've probably forgotten what things were like when you were in school.

      Unless I just went to a high school in bizarro-land, the vast majority of the kids there were completely uninterested in learning anything, other than how to be "cool" or smoke or whatever.

      Showing my age a little, but when I was in highschool (early 80's), video games and computers were a rarity, and things like text messaging and email (at home) were non-existant. I think there are other factors here; I had a video game console and a computer, and spent countless hours playing video games instead of doing homework. And yet, my grades were good.

      You see, I had motivation because I wanted to get the heck out of Dodge and go to university. I suspect the kids who don't want to learn have no motivation, they're just there killing time until they can drop out and get the same hopeless job their parents and friends all have.
      --
      - chrish
  23. How about... by mogrify · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... a USDA meat-packing plant inspector?

    --
    perl -e 'foreach(values %SIG){$_="IGNORE";}while(){}'
    1. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not a bad job. I've worked in a meat-packing plant, and we were always informed in advance that the inspectors would come, so it was nice and clean when they showed up.

    2. Re:How about... by General+Alcazar · · Score: 1

      Not until you meet this guy.

    3. Re:How about... by RadioTV · · Score: 1

      That's funny - I used to work at a meat packing plant and we had several inspectors on site at all times.

      --
      I have great faith in fools - self confidence my friends call it. - Edgar Allan Poe
  24. not true by chocolatetrumpet · · Score: 1

    This issue was published quite a while ago. Why is it just now appearing here?

    Not true:

    By William Speed Weed | November 2004

    --
    Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
    1. Re:not true by maxume · · Score: 1

      I recieved my november issue sometime in october...

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:not true by sailforsingapore · · Score: 1

      I think the massive awesomeness of having the name "William Speed Weed" in a by-line needs to be pointed out here...

    3. Re:not true by Seraphim1982 · · Score: 1

      Which means it was in the November issue, which appeared in the middle of October. If you look right now you can find things labled "December 2004".

    4. Re:not true by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I heard he made up his name because he really likes to smoke William.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  25. Mod up parent - Funny! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hilarious!

  26. What about.. by Enaku · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dubbya's speechwriter?

    1. Re:What about.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not such a bad job. You can make up lines like "Our enemies will never stop thinking of ways to hurt americans, and neither will we" and get away with it completely! No one actually proofs what you write, you know.

    2. Re:What about.. by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      No where near as frustrating as being his speech therapist.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    3. Re:What about.. by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      How about being Theresa Heinz-Kerry's Husband? The money's great but still...

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  27. Last year's list by quizwedge · · Score: 5, Informative

    The link mentioned in the previous slashdot article no longer works. Compliments of the WayBackMachine

    --
    I have no .sig
  28. Last Year's List by Noksagt · · Score: 4, Funny
    We also linked to last year's list.
    In fact, it was so good that they linked to it twice. No word yet as to when they'll re-run this one.

    In all seriousness, the first posting of last year's list does have some great comments.
  29. Public school Science teacher? by JPriest · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It rated only 2 positions below help desk tech, all my science teachers in shool seems to like their jobs.

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    1. Re:Public school Science teacher? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because they were all high. All the time. You think chemistry sets stop working after the dismisal bell rings? FOOL!

  30. Computer help-desk?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How the heck is that a horrible job? If you're stressed by talking on the phone all day and playing minesweeper you've got big problems. It seems these people compare themselves to the callers and greatly overestimate their own computer skills. Since the people who call aren't the computer gurus that they are (they never took the 10 day training course, after all), these cubicle monkeys inflate their egos more and more and do nothing but complain. Send all their jobs to India? Why don't we send THEM to India?

    1. Re:Computer help-desk?! by devkM · · Score: 0
      How the heck is that a horrible job? If you're stressed by talking on the phone all day and playing minesweeper you've got big problems. It seems these people compare themselves to the callers and greatly overestimate their own computer skills. Since the people who call aren't the computer gurus that they are (they never took the 10 day training course, after all), these cubicle monkeys inflate their egos more and more and do nothing but complain. Send all their jobs to India? Why don't we send THEM to India?


      Imagine being fed calls from people who have been sitting on hold for an hour and are so hopelessly irritated that their computer doesn't work to begin with that they would be considered 'irate' with NO wait time at all. Now imagine that you only have five minutes to calm these people down and eek enough information out of them to diagnose the problem AND THEN actually get them to cooperate enough to fix it by telling them what to do. Have you ever even attempted to talk someone through fixing a computer over the phone? Surely you have not attempted this while he is annoyed, pissed off, confused, and completely frustrated. Have you ever heard the phrase "My thingie doesnt do the thing anymore.", or received the responce "Nothing" after asking what the customer sees on his screen? Now imagine that these calls come in as fast as you can take them with not even a second to catch your breath in between calls. It's one after another; you get a break only for lunch and maybe a short smoke break if the queue isn't too backed up. Do you have any idea what kind of stamina it takes to do this for hours on end, day in and day out? As for your reference to the skills of these people, you are mistaken. For the most part, tech support engineers are very capable. The problem is that they only have five minutes to do their job. This is usually not enough time to do anything productive. Tech support engineers are regularly told to use phrases like "Cold reboot" to get people off the phone. (As in "okay, now you'll need to turn the computer off and wait a full minute before turning it on again. No, ma'am, I'm sorry, I cannot wait on the phone with you. Have a nice evening.") Finally, immagine getting paid less than $20k to do this.

      Yes, help-desk is definately a bad job.

      -kM
  31. O/T Your Sig: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bush won. You can change your sig now, unless you're going to be testing tampons in that bush.

  32. Grossed out by bstadil · · Score: 4, Funny
    Sorry if I grossed someone out.

    Your Sig was the worst part.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:Grossed out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why can't I see anyone's signatures? I feel I'm missing something. Do I need to be logged in?

    2. Re:Grossed out by oexeo · · Score: 1, Informative

      yes

  33. Cleaning the monkey cages... by Trikenstein · · Score: 3, Funny
    In 28 Days Later.

    Even if you don't get bit, the staff dusts you *just to be sure*.

    Talk about temp help....

    1. Re:Cleaning the monkey cages... by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      The first reaction I had when I read the subject of your post was, "how hard is it to run a fucking vacuum through the Oval Office now and then?"

  34. hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, due to your sig I see you really give a shit about the casualties of war.

    1. Re:hypocrite by metlin · · Score: 2, Informative

      The parent's sig is designed to seek attention.

      See this thread.

      Gee, and you fell for it.

    2. Re:hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Could you be more specific?

      Are you talking about the 1,000,000+ casualties when Saddam invaded Iran in 1980?

      Or are you talking about the 300,000-400,000 casualties of Saddam's war on the Iraqi people?

      Or are you talking about the 20,000 - 35,000 casualties when Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1990?

      Or are you talking about the the 14,000 - 17,000 counted at Iraqibodycount which is a one time cost to stop Saddams murderous regime?

      Or are you talking about the ... "creative" numbers in that now famous Lancet article? It is really amazing. The United States has a mortality rate of 8.5/1,000 whereas they found Iraq had a mortality rate of 5/1,000 before the war (p. 4, results) which they used to "calculate" a total of 8,000 to 194,000 excess deaths with the "most likely" value of 98,000. (Check out those confidence intervals.) Some find those numbers fishy, or simply unrealistic.

      Do you care about the millions that Saddam killed? If so, don't worry, he won't be killing anymore.

    3. Re:hypocrite by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      You make the assumption that the next leader will be better than Saddam. Given that the U.S. endorsed and supported him, and has done so poorly in so many other countries, that would be a poor assumption. Hopefully for their sake, the new leader is better.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    4. Re:hypocrite by Julia+Cameron · · Score: 0, Troll
      • Do you care about the millions that Saddam killed? If so, don't worry, he won't be killing anymore.

      Erm... no. That's our job now.

      --
      Julia Cameron
      Oich ù agus hiùraibh éile
    5. Re:hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's our job now.

      What an idiot. Please stop voting. And driving, and handling anything sharp around other people for that matter.

    6. Re:hypocrite by Julia+Cameron · · Score: 0, Troll
      • What an idiot. Please stop voting. And driving, and handling anything sharp around other people for that matter.

      Well, Saddam is in custody. And over a year ago, Chimp Boy landed on a big ship and smirked over a job well done. Oh, aye... sure.

      Someone is killing all those Iraqi civilians. It isn't me who is killing them, and neither is Saddam anymore. No, you people, with a wee bit of help from the insurgents, have taken over killing them now.

      I'm a structural engineer. If we did as poor a job of putting up the Twin Towers as your so-called 'Intelligence' agencies did by not paying attention to all the reports that came in to their agencies about terrorist threats, those buildings would have collapsed without anyone having to fly planes into them. In other words, if I did my job as incompetently as Condi Rice did hers, I'd be unemployed, or possibly in jail. Yet, Chimp Boy promoted her. So who's the idiot? You lot re-elected him. What you fools call 'the blame game', we call 'accountability'. Oh. And I have a perfect driving record.

      Every building my group ever designed is still standing. It's not that we're brilliant -- it's that we know how to do our jobs.

      (Usual disclaimer: This is no slur on the soldiers, but on the neocon fools who planned -- and I use that word loosely -- this tragedy.)

      --
      Julia Cameron
      Oich ù agus hiùraibh éile
  35. kind of like the job by thomasa · · Score: 1

    If I got paid what I get now as an IT worker, I would rather drag a blanket through the woods singing songs.

  36. Grad Students? by mkeroppi · · Score: 1

    If that's even a job, it'll certainly be at the top.

  37. Wrong lists, Slashdot had de answer by gallir · · Score: 1

    Yes, you just published the answer in the previous article (and before). Obviously the worst job in science was that scholar that spent a year at EA. Of course.

    --
    sgis ddo ekil t'nod i
  38. ARRRRRRRRRRGH! by crimethinker · · Score: 3, Funny
    Rosanne Barr's gynecologist

    Picture the puke scene from Team America: World Police and you've got a good idea of HALF of what I just went through.

    You, sir, should be kicked off slashdot, post-haste.

    -paul

    --
    Pistol caliber is like religion: everyone has their favourite, and theirs is the only right choice.
    1. Re:ARRRRRRRRRRGH! by gekko513 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't Rosanne Barr quite average looking if you compare with reality and not Hollywood? If so I would think gynecologist would top your list in general if you think it's so disgusting.

    2. Re:ARRRRRRRRRRGH! by RealProgrammer · · Score: 1
      You, sir, should be kicked off slashdot, post-haste.

      Sorry it was so disturbing. I was only going for mildly amusing, not utterly revolting.

      --
      sigs, as if you care.
  39. Hilarious? by Trikenstein · · Score: 1
    Rosanne Barr's gynecologist

    I can't think of anything more hideous.

    In fact everytime I think about it everything turns white and I hear a continuous tone.

    I think its some kind of defense mechanism, or survival skill.

  40. MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is ANYTHING but insightful. He misread the story, as several posters have pointed out.

  41. Ewwwww! by Schwarzchild · · Score: 1

    Don't her patients have any sphincter control?

    --

    "sweet dreams are made of this..."

    1. Re:Ewwwww! by new500 · · Score: 1

      Don't her patients have any sphincter control?

      That just grossed me out for a connected reason :

      World's Worst Job :

      Anal Wart tester at the Goat website man's clinic.

    2. Re:Ewwwww! by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can only imagine the shock his dentist had when she asked him to "Open Wide".

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
  42. Vote for the worst at sciscoop! by apsmith · · Score: 2, Interesting

    here's the poll results... Main site - poll is halfway down on the right.

    --

    Energy: time to change the picture.

  43. eeeeeeeew by humuhumunukunukuapu' · · Score: 4, Interesting

    . . . the female Dracunculus medinensis migrates from the gut to a point just under the skin of, say, a leg, where she then commences growth to a length of as great as three feet, and where, ultimately, she lays her eggs. When the thousands of babies make their joyous arrival, they blister the skin and pop through, leaving Mom behind. The traditional way to get rid of her is to wrap her head around a stick and twist very slowly--one turn of the stick per day--for weeks or months, depending on how long she is. (This treatment is so old that it inspired the ancient snake-and-pole aesculapius symbol of medicine.)

    --
    i saw the baby, and the baby looked at me
    1. Re:eeeeeeeew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There goes my Thanksgiving dinner.

    2. Re:eeeeeeeew by LarsWestergren · · Score: 2, Informative

      "We can't show pictures or even really talk about these diseases," says parasitologist Eric Ottesen of Emory University. "Society just isn't ready for it."

      I hope no one tells him about the internet:
      Worms
      Scroll down to see the stuff described in the article if you are curious. NOT for the faint of heart obviously. If you thought it sounded fun to get a huge scrotum, look at that poor guy.

      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

  44. Can they say that at PopSci? by orbitor · · Score: 1
    What floors me is the 'RTFM indeed' comment.

    I mean, holy shit, this is the magazine my grandpa collected...that ain't right!

    1. Re:Can they say that at PopSci? by MmmDee · · Score: 1
      'RTFM indeed' comment

      What's wrong with "Read The [Fine | Friendly] Manual"?

      --
      No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
  45. Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    You do realize that over half of Americans reject the standard theories (important word: theories, not laws) for the origin of life and the universe that are presented in secular science education, don't you? And that slightly over 40% of Americans believe that the Bible is the literal Word of God and that the book of Genesis is the true story of our origins?

    If it comforts you to use invective like "religious radicals", then so be it. Just realize that you are maligning and impugning over half of the population of America. We are not some small fringe movement. We've opened our eyes and taken a look at the real evidence and know that science is definitely not on the right page either factually or spiritually.

    1. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting
      You realize that over half of Americans are fucking idiots, don't you? The Bible is a fucking storybook, with the New Testament authors writing about things 80 years after they happened, and four telephone generations away from Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

      Half of Americans thought Sadam Hussein was responsible for 9/11 because Bush told them so. That doesn't mean they were right. It means they are complete fucktards that will believe whatever the fuck they are told.

      And _I_ don't care if I am maligning half of America. That part of the population is a waste of flesh. Use your brain and tell me where the fucking dinosaurs are in the bible. Or the trilobites. Or any of the thousands of species of animals that we have EVIDENCE of their existence yet are never mentioned in your book of fairy tales. I believe a guy named jesus walked the earth. There's pleanty of evidence suggesting he did. But water-into-wine and that God snapped his fingers and lo, He made the firmament? Come on! I'll at least acknowledge the argument for intelligent design, but telling me Genesis is the true story and the Bible is the literal Word of God? Please. If you completely ingore everything I've just posted, at least answer me this: which version is the Word of God? The King James? The NIV? The aramaic and greek version? Because if one version is true, then you have to acknowledge the others aren't. How can you have the Word of God be two different things and it's pretty obvious the king james is not the same as the NIV. I'll bet the same happens when you compare the aramiac and the king james. So which version is the true Word of God?

    2. Re:Religious radicals? by connorbd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Please look at talkorigins.org. No legitimate scientist doubts that evolution happens; it's how it happens that gets debated.

    3. Re:Religious radicals? by Bush+Pig · · Score: 4, Interesting

      'Religious radicals' is a fair call, except I'd be tempted to add a few more carefully chosen phrases, like 'not very bright', 'deluded', 'ill-informed', and 'poorly educated'. I'm sure you get my drift. I don't believe you've opened your eyes and looked at the real evidence at all, otherwise you'd be convinced that the theories of evolution offer a considerably more likely explanation than do the fairy-tales of a bunch of wandering sheep-herders. It's very sad that more than half the population of the US is in the same boat.

      I'm just thankful we don't have too many of these people in Australia, although the number is growing, largely because, I suspect, science education is poorly funded here too.

      --
      What a long, strange trip it's been.
    4. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Just because there are a lot of you doesn't mean you're not stupid and wrong. There were many people who thought the world was flat and there were many people who thought having white skin made you better than people who didn't and even today there are some who still belive that but it doesn't change the fact that they are wrong.

      People need to be maligned and impugned when they are wrong.

    5. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of course it is useful to realize that whenever you translate anything from one language to another, you will have differences between the same texts.
      Then again you wouldn't know this since you are american and most likely don't know a second language.
      No matter how hard you try, you will never translate something and have it be exactly the same. The same idea, and meaning yes. Just try reading the french subtitles to a movie compared to the english. Most of the time the movie industry isn't even close!

    6. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Use your brain and tell me where the fucking dinosaurs are in the bible.

      Job 40:15-24, 41:1-34. And before you say that the first is an elephant or a hippopotamus, ask yourself how many of those have tails like cedar trees... (vs17).

    7. Re:Religious radicals? by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1

      Actually, I speak french fluently and german passably. The point is: how can you have the literal Word of God when its been translated so many times that no one knows what the original divine version was? The grandparent was saying that the Bible is the Word of God and my questions is: which version?

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    8. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Actually, the Bible I have in front of ME says it is an Elephant. But it also says "that I made along with you" Dinosuars died out way before humans walked the earth. Nice try. Thanks for playing.

    9. Re:Religious radicals? by Bowling+Moses · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "You do realize that over half of Americans reject the standard theories (important word: theories, not laws) [emphasis added] for the origin of life and the universe that are presented in secular science education, don't you?"

      Yes, it troubles me greatly, as does your post and far, far too many just like it. The word "theory" in science doesn't mean "half-assed guess" like it does in normal parlance. It means an idea that has been rigorously tested and is supported by a mountain of evidence. Theory of relativity. Theory of gravity. Germ theory. Theory of evolution. All supported by mountains of evidence, all have stood the test of time and are all highly unlikely to go away anytime soon. Sure any one or more of them could be wrong. Some may be able to adapt to new evidence, some might (heavy, very heavy emphasis on might) be relegated to the scrapheap of disproven scientific ideas...like phlogiston or creationism. The latter one is the most troubling. Two hundred years ago the dominant scientific idea in the west was a special creation taking place 6000 years ago. Christian geologists went out looking for this, but instead found evidence incompatible with a young earth, thus refuting young-earth creationism (note: not creation, a supernatural event and thus outside the realm of science. A god or gods could create using any means s/he/it/they deem appropriate and are thus undetectable to naturalistic science). Modern day creation-science and its bastard child "intelligent design" are just attempts to turn back scientific progress over 200 years. So yes, it does bother me a great deal to see that certain well-established scientific theories are thrown out because of the religous ideology of certain groups. Whats worse is that these religious radicals aren't objecting to the science, they're objecting to the implications of established science towards certain literalistic interpretations of the Bible, not science at all. There is one scientifically valid idea about the origin of species currently, and like it or not it is evolution.

    10. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Let's hear it for tolerance!

    11. Re:Religious radicals? by Timber_Z · · Score: 0
    12. Re:Religious radicals? by hengist · · Score: 1

      The sooner this number becomes the majority, the sooner the USA will decline in irrelevance.

    13. Re:Religious radicals? by hengist · · Score: 1

      Dammit, should say "decline into irrelevance"

    14. Re:Religious radicals? by Locmar · · Score: 1

      King James. Duh. *ducks*

    15. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "People need to be maligned and impugned when they are wrong."

      You should realize that it's people like you that hold science back by making it hostile to so many people. If you would instead talk to them nicely and show them that it *isn't* hostile to them, you'd find a lot less opposition to things like evolution.

      Instead you shove it in their face and tell them that it proves they've wasted their life with their religion.

      I can't understand you people. You're hypocrites.

    16. Re:Religious radicals? by magefile · · Score: 1

      In science, "theory" means something radically different than in standard English. Check your facts - and oh, you're not half of America. BTW, which is the "real" creation story - there are two in the Bible, y'know?

    17. Re:Religious radicals? by magefile · · Score: 1

      Like he said ... *legitimate* scientists.

    18. Re:Religious radicals? by xenocide2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hello, I'm a Kansan. You might remember us from such right wing propaganda as "God Hates Fags" or a more recent but ephemeral debate over teaching evolution in our schools. I don't have a dog named Toto, and by my local estimation, pancakes are rather bumpy.

      So I'm used to dealing with invective, and even the religious right. A few might be my neighbors. But I reject your hypothesis. "Slightly over 40 percent of Americans" is an extreme interpretation of a stastic of relgious beliefs. My own mother admits she feels the Old Testament to be closer to myth than reality, and generally believes that evolution holds more scientific merit than the newly uprising creationist theory. Some Catholics don't adhere to the abolition of birth control, and I hear some even support abortions. Simply because 40 percent marked down Catholic or Protestant or whatever that number includes doesn't mean they hold belief in common with every other member of the congregation. In fact, I'd say thats downright impossible. Personally, I think that Lamarck had better science than creationism or whatever you call it today; a text cannot be adequate substitute for experimental investigation and observation. And I'm not willing to sign off on ignoring evolutionary theory because its spiritually convinient.

      Its debateable whether one can call creationism a theory, and I'm willing to let it into our textbooks, but to exclude evolution is both ridiculus and ignores what is the most plausible theory put forth yet. I think mutual inclusion is perhaps a decent middle grounds to acommodate our individual beliefs.

      So when I hear people complain about teaching evolution in the classroom, I say to them: fine, butif you don't want it in the classroom, don't expect your children to attend college. In the suburb where I live, that works reasonably well. In other parts of Kansas, that statement would likely be met with laughter, and likely acceptance of the terms.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    19. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say to take a look at the hebrew and the greek. Many scholars do (and have done) this; that would be the "correct version."

    20. Re:Religious radicals? by OmniVector · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Instead you shove it in their face and tell them that it proves they've wasted their life with their religion.
      and? religion is the opiat of the people my friend. it's a tool for control, and for happiness without thought. religion is the collective gathering of people who can't make up their on theology and believe whatever they want to believe, collectively. they need their beliefs pre-digsted.

      --
      - tristan
    21. Re:Religious radicals? by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sure. I'll agree with that. But is that the version "most Americans" consider the literal Word of God? I doubt it because most probably haven't read it. They consider their version the literal Word of God, which is the whole point of my beef with the poster's point: he on his high horse by saying that 40% of Americans believe the Bible to be the Word of God and that it has more weight than science. But if you actually looked at it, 5% probably think its the Hebrew version, 25% think King James, and 10% think NIV. How can "40%" think the Bible is the "literal Word of God" if they can't agree which version is the literal one? Yet science is the one in question. riiiiiiiight.

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    22. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Instead you shove it in their face and tell them that it proves they've wasted their life with their religion.

      Not our fault the truth hurts. I'll buy the moderate belief in a higher being. The human body alone is sooooo complex and deals in such an amazingly detailed way with even the simplest annoyance, e.g., pathogens, it is sometimes hard for me to believe it all happened by chance. But to blame evolutionists for creationists' uncomfortable lump in their throat because they feel the shame from being gullible? Please. Don't blame others for your following an unquestioning path down to misinformation

    23. Re:Religious radicals? by Brian_Confucius · · Score: 1

      Could anyone tell me exactly how Genesis and the theory of evolution are incompatable? Besides the word choice that has resulted from semiaccurate transalation, there really isn't anything. There is a difference between believing that the Bible is the literal word of God (I believe that too) and to believe that, because of some poor diction in your KJV Bible, that the universe was made in 144 hours. To put it another way, there are quotes in the Bible that state that the Sun "rises" and "sets". Does this mean that a geocentric solar system is the correct interpretation of the Bible? Of course not. You can believe (without being a heretic) that Jesus and Darwin can dance on the head of a pin, as it were.

    24. Re:Religious radicals? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      eat more shit, people. after all, millions of flies cannot be wrong.

      --
      Conservatism: The fear that somewhere, somehow, someone you think is your inferior is being treated as your equal.
    25. Re:Religious radicals? by superyooser · · Score: 1
      religion is the opiat of the people my friend. it's a tool for control, and for happiness without thought.

      You just quoted Karl Marx in your condemnation of public control.

    26. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's assume that's true. My point was that these methods are helping to cement the beliefs of these people. It's not helping! It's making it harder for them to accept science, because people like you are making it hostile to them.

    27. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't take it all in context. I'm not blaming it on "evolutionists," I believe in evolution! Why do you think I said, "their face," (oops, that should be faces) instead of, "our faces." I said that this in-your-face approach is making them less likely to accept evolution. Are you more likely to be open to an idea that is presented in a friendly manner, or one that's being yelled at you paired with insults?

    28. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On second thought...

      It *is* your fault though. The truth wouldn't hurt if you weren't using it to belittle them and insult their intelligence!

      By "your" I mean any of you who don't try to explain it but instead insult their intelligence. Hell, don't bother trying to explain it if you don't want to, just don't insult them for not accepting it. It sets your own supposed cause back.

    29. Re:Religious radicals? by superyooser · · Score: 2, Interesting
      To put it another way, there are quotes in the Bible that state that the Sun "rises" and "sets". Does this mean that a geocentric solar system is the correct interpretation of the Bible?

      Whoa! The National Weather Service has "sunrise" and "sunset" on its web site. I think you should send them an email with the correct information right away! They obviously believe in a geocentric solar system. ;-)

      Could anyone tell me exactly how Genesis and the theory of evolution are incompatible?

      Yes.

    30. Re:Religious radicals? by bigbird · · Score: 2, Interesting
      'Religious radicals' is a fair call, except I'd be tempted to add a few more carefully chosen phrases, like 'not very bright', 'deluded', 'ill-informed', and 'poorly educated'. [snip] I'm just thankful we don't have too many of these people in Australia, although the number is growing, largely because, I suspect, science education is poorly funded here too.

      Well, I may be "deluded" to be skeptical of evolutionary science's claims, but no-one has ever accused me of being "not very bright" (not before this post), and I'm certainly not "poorly educated". "Over educated" is more accurate - all thanks to the Australian education system.

      I have no problem believing (with a healthy degree of skepticism) the results of experimental science. But the absolute faith in a theory that can't be experimentally tested (and I don't think experiments on a few hundred generations of drosophilia demonstrate a great deal) and which therefore will forever remain unprovable, to me appears ludicrous.

    31. Re:Religious radicals? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Hey, thanks. That's my new sig.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    32. Re:Religious radicals? by Bush+Pig · · Score: 1

      I'm extremely tolerant - I just don't suffer fools gladly.

      --
      What a long, strange trip it's been.
    33. Re:Religious radicals? by Bush+Pig · · Score: 2, Informative

      Okay - I may be misjudging you somewhat, as you haven't made your position completely clear, but I'm assuming you believe in creation "science", or at least that you reject any theories of evolution.

      The thing is, I'm not sure how you can claim that evolution hasn't been experimentally tested (and I'm not just talking about fruitflies). There is a fossil record (admittedly incomplete) which indicates the mutability of species over millions of years. In just the case of primates, there's strong indications of a direct line from lemur-like creatures to us, through the great apes. I'm not a biologist, so I don't have reams of facts at my fingertips, or a very deep knowledge of evolution, but I still find it far more believable than the folk-tales of people who (to paraphrase Harry Harrison) didn't even understand the mechanism of a rainbow, because there is _absolutely_ _no_ independant, verifiable evidence of the absolute truth of those fairytales. I'm also pretty sure that there is experimental evidence of evolution (as in: The theory predicts this, but we've not found evidence of it yet. Oh, look, here's that evidence. Notch up another win for Occam's Razor.) but I must admit I'm unable to recall a specific instance. Go and talk to a bioligist. Maybe they'll be able to remember the stuff I can't right now.

      --
      What a long, strange trip it's been.
    34. Re:Religious radicals? by tantrum · · Score: 0, Troll
      have no problem believing (with a healthy degree of skepticism) the results of experimental science. But the absolute faith in a theory that can't be experimentally tested (and I don't think experiments on a few hundred generations of drosophilia demonstrate a great deal) and which therefore will forever remain unprovable, to me appears ludicrous.


      Well, too bad for you. Feel free to play with imaginary friend, then.


      God never was and never will be.

      If you want to pray to something, pray to the sun, as that prolly is what has given life to the earth. Or you could send all your money to me, and your prayers would be just as likely to come true.

    35. Re:Religious radicals? by RsG · · Score: 1

      For the biblical literalists who seem to find there way onto /. these days:

      (this is not original to me btw, and I found it hilarious when I first read it).

      "Let me ask you something. I'm assuming that you are one of those people who believes the bible is literally historically accurate. Based soley on the number of land animal species that taxonimists have identified (and we're talking tens of millions to date), and factoring in all of the extinct fossil species that you believe could not have evolved (hundreds of millions at an archeologists guess), what would the dimensions of Noah's Arc have to be? "Two of every animal" would require a phenominally huge superfreighter, and that's not including food and fresh water for forty days (remember that most water is not drinkable due to salt content). An arc, remember, that was supposedly fourty cubits and built by one man.

      Moreover, how did land animals subsequently migrate from the Arc's hypothetical landing site to their present habitats? How exactly did the South American primates get from Eurasia to South America. And let's not forget Austrailia, which is surrounded by the Pacific Ocean, yet has plentiful land animals that cannot posssibly swim (and you say could not evolve)."

      Remember that majority opinion does not equal reality. And the united states is not the entire world; there are scientifically literate nations that have no religious right to speak of and no problem with evolution. Stick to a fundamentalist interpretation of a broze age text, and you will be left behind.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    36. Re:Religious radicals? by DataCannibal · · Score: 1

      All you show is that you don't understand the meaning of the word "theory" or the scientific method.

      You "know" fuck all.

      --
      No but, yeah but, no but...
    37. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when is religion a tool for happiness?

    38. Re:Religious radicals? by OmniVector · · Score: 1

      happiness might be a poor word choice. pacified is more applicable.

      --
      - tristan
    39. Re:Religious radicals? by KUHurdler · · Score: 1

      "fine, butif you don't want it in the classroom, don't expect your children to attend college."

      And to think, I made it all the way through college. Amazing.

      signed,
      Kansas Believer in Creation.

      --
      Fix Your Own TV - RiddledTV.com Avoid the Landfill
    40. Re:Religious radicals? by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Its debateable whether one can call creationism a theory,

      No, it's not debatable whether one can call creationism a theory because it's not. Let's start with the deifinition of a theory:

      A well tested (as opposed to a hypothesis which is less well tested) explanation for observed events. A theory must allow one to make predictions which can be tested by experiment. When the results of those experiments are as predicted, it lends support to the theory as a good explanation. If the results are not as predicted, they may lead to the eventual modification of the theory, or even its replacement.

      Since creationism/intelligent design relies on a supreme being to start the whole thing rolling, a being which can neither be proven nor disproven, the arguments for these concepts fall flat. Without being able to verify or deny any part of ones thoughts (I refuse to call them theories) you cannot have a theory. End of story.

      One can argue until they're blue in the face about how their evidence shows they're thoughts are just as plausible as someone elses but unless/until they can offer proof of a supreme being their ideas are relegated to the same pile as Santa Claus and the Easter bunny.

      Next thing you know people will want to believe that the Grand Canyon is only a few thousand years old and was made by the flood during Noahs time. Oh wait, that's already being done.

      Well at least the fact that humans and dinosaurs did not live at the same time is still a safe subject. Er, maybe not.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    41. Re:Religious radicals? by KUHurdler · · Score: 1

      Actually it was built by one man - and his three sons, for over a hundred years.

      They were on the ark for much longer than 40 days (thats how long it rained) the waters receded for over a year. However, there were many animal types that could have already been extinct by that time. That wasn't all THAT many years ago. The dimensions of the ark were 300 x 50 x 30 cubits. None of those numbers is 40.

      You should really read what your arguing against sometime. Or whoever actually wrote the argument should. Its only about 10 pages?

      I find it humorous that you can pass over that there was a great flood over the whole earth without arguing it, but then argue that the animals could never have made it onto the boat. By the way, even evolutionists have a theory that the continents were not always seperated. It doesn't sound so implausible to you because they say it happened billions and billions of years ago, which somehow makes all assinine theories sound more possible.

      --
      Fix Your Own TV - RiddledTV.com Avoid the Landfill
    42. Re:Religious radicals? by sploxx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think your problem (and the problem of people thinking like you) is that your fear science or the implications of it. OR that you simply reject some scientific facts because they contradict the words in your bible/quran/whatever.

      People just do not want to be descendants of apes and/or a bag full of various chemicals. Many feel somehow "controlled" by science and flee into pseudoscience, esoterics or religion which forbids reasoning. IMHO very understandable but still VERY stupid and dangerous for society.

      First of all, you have to realize that all the people who dig out these facts are also simply such meat bags.
      And second, and much more important, there are too many scientists today who mix their opinion with their findings. I think this is one of the major reasons why people get dragged into the silliest of cults.

      Examples:
      Take a biologist, his/her job may be to find about the evolotunary dependencies between various species (for example), NOT TO endorse social darwinism.

      Take a neurologist, his/her job may be to find about some thought processes, NOT to promote enslaving because "it is a scientific fact that noone has a free will".

      Of course these examples are exaggerated, but I hope you'll understand what I'm trying to say. Also, this list can be further extended.

      Both opinions (and they are sadly very widespread) result from silently pouring personal premises into the equations. And telling it in the way "I'm know, because I'm a scientist in that field.".

      IMHO, as a scientist, you have to remind yourself that you are describing the "objective" part of reality. Additional to pure philosophy which only uses rational thought (note that I didn't say "brain" here :-), you rely on your senses. You have to keep that in mind.

      If I say "time started with the big bang some 13.7 billion of years ago and it doesn't make sense to speak about 'the time before'", I'm extrapolating and interpreting scientific facts with my rational mind and therefore using my senses (or those of other people) to give that answer.

      I hear you saying now: But in the end, I can't really be sure that everything works according to the laws of nature, that there is 'really no god'. IMHO you're right.
      - And, for some of those atheistic nerds here: It's dishonest to oneself to strongly deny the existence of any GOD but to think OTOH "Maybe I'm just a brain with electrodes connected to it or I'm just a a simulation running on someones computer".

      I don't know for sure and maybe I'll never know, but why should I believe -> therefore I'm agnostic( and thinking that I have a free will). Yes, this is probably my own twisted religion. But at least I try to distinguish between reasoning and belief.

      I'll try to say it in yet another way: By letting in astrology/religion/... into your *everyday life* and by believing in 'religous facts' which contradict scientific facts(*), you're either
      a) denying that your senses give the proper output, so to say :)
      b) abandoning rational thought, i.e. logic reasoning.

      ---------------
      (*) - There are of course, (too) many scientific "theories" which do not deserve that title because they are just called that by the more influental people in the community. And, theories have borders, i.e. newtons law is good enough to describe the motions of the planets around the sun but not a black hole.
      But, please, this is not the case with evolution.

    43. Re:Religious radicals? by RsG · · Score: 1

      What part of "this is not original" to me was lost on you? I was merely reposting someone else's argument that I had saved when I first read it and found funny (hint: it's meant as a semi-serious joke, at least I think).

      As for the factual stuff, I bluntly don't care how big it was, it's still too damn small. The whole point of the joke is that arguing over a religious interpretation of history, complete with deluges, miacles and creation myths, is like arguing over klingon anatomy among star trek nerds; it wastes your time and starts pointless contradictory flamewars. As for the supercontinent theory, that's geology buddy, not biology. If you can't tell the difference between the two, then the public school system really has failed you. Saying "evolutionists" (which isn't the right term in any case) have a theory about _tectonic_ drift makes you look like a real idiot. You want to tell me to read a bible so I'll understand it's "history"? Then you go read a textbook and get back to me when you have some basic understanding of the different sciences.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    44. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the Bible I have in front of ME says it is an Elephant.

      Man's interpretation. The word is "behemoth", which like many words in Job, does not appear anywhere else in the Bible, so we only have this description to go on. And you still haven't answered my question regarding the comparison to cedar trees, but I'll throw some more in for you - some believe that it may be referring to the elephant's nose (ie. trunk), but it says in v24 that his nose cannot be pierced... so (a) why wouldn't you be able to pierce an elephant's trunk, and (b) why should it say "tail" earlier when the word "nose" is used here anyway?

      But it also says "that I made along with you" Dinosuars died out way before humans walked the earth.

      Along with the coelacanth, the "Wollemi pine" tree, the "Gladiator" insect, and various others. Because evolutionists, like all human beings, are infallible. </sarcasm>

    45. Re:Religious radicals? by jester22c · · Score: 2, Informative

      As far as religeous texts go, there are more intact (and consistent) greek manuscripts of the Bible than any other religeous book. Yet somehow the Bible gets all the flak because it is/was so widely translated. If you compare the originals to todays 'interpretations' they are definately agreeable enough (and I have compared them) and most of the mistranslations are menial compared to the big picture. The problem is that the vernacular had definitive words for each interpretation while our modern English language interchanges words like crazy.

    46. Re:Religious radicals? by KUHurdler · · Score: 1

      "What part of "this is not original" to me was lost on you?" ...And you want me to read your textbooks, when you can't even read my posts that your arguing against? It was pretty clear that you stated it wasn't your argument, which is why I said "..Or whoever actually wrote the argument..." However, when you present (or even re-present) an argument, it is YOUR argument.

      I said evolutionsists because, for me, generally there are two sides in this never-ending debate. Evolution/Creation. So I will state it again. Some people who believe in evoltuion also subscribe to the theory that the continents were not always seperated. I didn't say it was an evolutionist theory.
      I never said a thing about it being biology.

      By the way, no one else thought your "joke" was funny either, and calling me an idiot makes you look really smart. The verdict is still out on whether public schools have failed me.

      --
      Fix Your Own TV - RiddledTV.com Avoid the Landfill
    47. Re:Religious radicals? by JuggleGeek · · Score: 1

      Before you say that it's a dinosaur, you're going to have to explain about dinosaurs with bones made of bronze. (vs18).

    48. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So explain this. If the images we see of the Andromeda galaxy left the Andromeda galaxy 2.5 million years ago, please explain how the earth can only be 6,000/4,500/whatever-dubious-number-creationists-a ssign-to-it years old? Or did God create the Andromeda galaxy and sit on his keister for "a day" before creating the Earth? Or do you also not believe in the speed of light?

    49. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Man's interpretation. The word is "behemoth",

      Exactly. Man's interpretation. I wear a gogleplat made of silver with cyclindrical protrusions. Don't know what a gogleplat is? Well of course not because it's never been used before. And while they may be cyclidrical, the buttons on my watch are more like nubs. But because I misdescribed it slightly and will never use the word again, it's probably fair game to assume it is a magical amulet, right? I'll buy intelligent design because it at least acknowledges all the scientific evidence in favor of evolution. But to "disprove" evolution by pointing to animals that didn't really die out is specious at best, laughable at worst. Sorry, to ignore all the evidence in favor of evolution, and stand firm that it couldn't even possibly be Designer-assisted evoultion, is assinine. That's like refusing to believe the earth is round.

    50. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This entire conversation is quite amusing to me, as I recently saw Pen and Tellers BULLSHIT. The town featured in the creationism segment is the town I grew up in. Glad I got away.

    51. Re:Religious radicals? by RsG · · Score: 1

      Sigh

      Ok, first I don't want to get a flame war going, especially not a creationist one. Ironically, the original post that I reposted was someones attempt at poking fun at _another_ such flamewar months ago. So, for the sake of maturity, I apologize for implying you are an idiot. Lets keep this civilized.

      FTR, you may have missed the parody humour; the joke is meant to be absurd as an anti-creationist argument. It is not a valid argument, in fact it isn't really an argument at all, and it makes both sides look ridiculous.

      In other words, I think the original poster was very deninitely tounge-in-cheek, and was poking fun at both sides of the flamewar. He (I assume it was a "he" - this is /.) might have been serious, but the way it's presented I highly doubt it. Reread the post if you don't believe me. You took it seriously, as did some others in all probability, but the gist of it is subtle absurdity.

      As for the supercontinent argument, sorry, but it really is a seperate issue. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the theory of evolution, nor is it particularly important from a biologist's standpoint. The fact that some people who beleive in one also beleive in the other is immaterial; I believe in the scientific validity of evolution and relativity, but that doesn't connect the two sciences in any way. You may be mixing up "evolutionists" with paelentologists (who study fossils, and support evolution as scientists - and also supercontinent theory). Sorry, but it really irks me when I hear someone lump two unrelated fields of science into an argument; it's like somebody wondering how come scientists can put a man on the moon but can't cure cancer.

      Oh, and for the record "evolutionist" is pretty antagonizing. People who accept a given scientific theory are not the same as a religious group, nor are they a single group. Generally, any attempt to lump people who disagree with your point of view into a single entity is bound to give people the idea that you're closed minded and unwilling to listen to reason. At least avoid making the matter "us vs them"; I didn't assume you were a christian when I responded, did I?

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    52. Re:Religious radicals? by jester22c · · Score: 1

      I'm going to take a stab in the dark here and guess that bronze was used figuratively incinuating strength given the density of the metal. Relating to the time period bronze was one of the strongest known substances at the time. But who knows, maybe they were giant robosauruses made out of erector set...

    53. Re:Religious radicals? by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

      I guess this puts me in the 3rd column.

      I believe in evolutionary creationism. I believe all life started from a single divine moment that took a bunch of random proteins and hooked them together and typed "go" at the console. This single celled creature went forward, ate something and split. From that point, the Gods just sat back and let natural evolution take its course.

      That same theory could also be extended to the migration from a single continent to the multiple continents that we've got today. One could argue that the Gods just saw what was going to happen an decided that they didn't need to influence things. Maybe they decided they wanted things in a specific spot for some reason and influenced things one way or the other. A fault line here, a n ocean current there, etc.

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    54. Re:Religious radicals? by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      I think you misunderstand me; all of the Board of Regents Universities were upset about this, and thereatened not to admit students that didn't have that as part of their studies. As you should know, this measure didn't pass, and I suspect that we both attended a biology class where evolution was taught.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    55. Re:Religious radicals? by Brian_Confucius · · Score: 1

      They obviously believe in a geocentric solar system. ;-)

      Yes, I realise these words are part of the vernacular. The point I was trying to make was that this word use, as well as Aristotelian philosophy, was the main reason the Roman Catholic Church was opposed to a heliocentric worldview.

      As for the Young-Earth/Old-Earth argument, if we continue that, we'd just be trading websites for weeks.

    56. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you're a bigot plain and simple.

      A person can be extremely smart and at the same time extremely wrong.

    57. Re:Religious radicals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their definition of happiness just doesn't mesh well with yours...

    58. Re:Religious radicals? by cortana · · Score: 1

      You assume that the speed of light has remained constant since then. ;)

      There was a Slashdot article quite recently about a new super-accurate atomic clock that will help scientists determine more readily whether our universal constants are really constant. We'll know in a few hundred years, I guess.

      Of course, it will probably mean that the light from Andromeda has been travelling for 2.5001 million years instead of just 2.5 million years. :)

  46. Thats easy!!! by adolfojp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Unemployment! But if you still consider your job to be worse than that...
    ...theres no need to fear, Reverend Sharpton is here! ;-)

    Cheers,
    Adolfo

  47. True story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I once got a job picking through garbage to separate the amount of paper that is thrown away that could have been recycled. It was such a joy when you come upon the used tampon, diaper or condom. Rotting food was wonderful too.

  48. I've got (most) of those jobs beat... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I spent one summer screening race horses for drugs... by chemically testing their urine.

    Yes, I had the joy of sitting in a lab and handling horse piss for eight hours a day. Let me tell you, the range of colour, texture, and viscosity of the stuff is truly mind-boggling.

    The one saving grace? I wasn't the guy that had to collect it from the source.

    1. Re:I've got (most) of those jobs beat... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, at least you weren't the guy who had to hold the cup.

  49. Were famous! by Stone316 · · Score: 2, Informative
    I grew up in St. John's, Newfoundland and its a beautiful place and i'm hoping to move back there (if I can find a job since the economy isn't the best..) The last time I visited was over 2 years ago but I still remember the smell of the harbour and picture the bubbling sewage, along with flocks of Seagulls like they were at a feast.

    I heard if you fall in you have to get a ton of shots.

    Some links of interest:
    http://www.ozfm.com/skycam.htm for a live webcame of the downtown core.
    http://www.stjohns.ca/cityservices/environment/har bour/cleanup.jsp The Harbour Cleanup Project website.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._John's,_Newfoundl and_and_Labrador A post on /. wouldn't be complete with a a wikipedia reference.

    --
    "Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
  50. Human Bidet for Linus Torvalds. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man, that seafood diet would be nauseating for this job.

  51. job interview out of college by morcheeba · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I found this neat company that made a system that controlled the thickness of sheet metal was it was being manufacturered. Kinda interesting, I thought... I could apply DSP algorithms and statistics to the problem. Low pass filter, etc...

    The factory tour went something like this:
    ----
    The core technology of the company was a non-contact system that used radiation to penetrate the steel and measure its thickness. Are you cool with radiation and wearing the exposure badge? Sure, not planning on any kids for a while...

    Now, this steel is pretty hot, so you've got to be careful not to touch it, ok? Sure.

    It's also relatively thin and the edges aren't the smoothest -- so, it's sharp. But it's steel, so it's still heavy. You wouldn't want to get any fingers you're particularily attached to near it. Uh, ok.

    And, it's moving out the mill at a fairly fast speed. Radioactive, Semi-molten, sharp and fast. Still ok? uh, yeah, sure.

    Finally, for some ungodly reason, it is dripping with acid. We don't know why; that's just part of the manufacturing. That's partly why we go with a non-contact measurement.

    Lastly, even though your resume is excellent, we're going to put you on the support team for at least a year. It's low pay, but there's lots of overtime and travel benefits. You'll go to all sorts of exotic mill towns.
    ----

    And that, my friends, is why I took the rocket-scientist job instead.

    1. Re:job interview out of college by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      And the most dangerous part of the system? One random moron who slips through the screening process. I come from a smelter town, and the smelter's HR screen can't have been very good since they had far more than their share. My favorite?

      There's a stage in the process where an enormous bucket carries molten lead from one area to the next. For some reason, things slowed down and a bucket sat around long enough for the surface of the lead to harden and it wouldn't pour. So what did the moron operator do? He took a metal rod, walked out onto the hardened lead and bashed at the crust with the rod. At least when being dipped in lead was used as a Medieval torture it wasn't self-inflicted.

  52. Seems Unlikely by heli0 · · Score: 1

    http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/article/0,209 67,713468,00.html

    "Each of us has about a 10 percent lifetime risk of contracting anal warts..."

    Perhaps the phraseology is just misleading.

    It is probably more like: "people that engage in unprotected sex have a 30% chance of contracting this STD, those that don't have a 0.01% chance of contracting it".

    It is certainly not an equal 10% chance for everyone.

    --
    Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
    1. Re:Seems Unlikely by mpatmcg · · Score: 1

      Maybe it meant that each of the scientists who study anal warts has a 10% lifetime risk of contracting them. I took the definition of "us" to be the scientists.

      --
      We will keep re-defining success until we are sucessful.
  53. Idiots of US unite... by ghoul · · Score: 1

    ... you have nothing to lose but your benefits. Just because a large no of people are idiots doesnt detract from the fact that they are idiots. The whole religious right has been created by the Republican partt. I mean if you look at it from a purely economic point of view Republican policies only benefit 1% of the population and if everyone voted as per their self interest(as it is supposed to work in an ideal democracy) no way can the Republicans can win election. So they cant win on economic issues so they have to come up with something that is so important for the poor that they will vote to starve themselves. Voila! Enter Creationism,anti gay rights and all the other irrelevant issues to detract people from whats really important. I mean the US is the only country in the world I have heard of where taxes go down as you earn more(its true you do not pay medicare and social security on any income above 100000!!!) I mean I am a poor student right now and if I was a citizen I would definitely vote Democrat. Not to say once I graduate and I am earning more than 100000 I will vote Republican!!!

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
    1. Re:Idiots of US unite... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Enter Creationism,anti gay rights and all the other irrelevant issues to detract people from whats really important."

      People from the left wing are making this into more of an issue than it was. "Moral issues" could have included people voting:

      -for Bush on abortion
      -for Kerry on abortion
      -for Bush on gay marriage
      -for Kerry on gay marriage
      -for Bush on their religious views
      -for Kerry on their religious views (or Bush's)

      All combined it only added up to about 20% of people surveyed.

  54. Re:Grad student - give me a break!! by jxyama · · Score: 1
    yeah, right - i hate that attitude. it's so self-serving

    i got a phd in particle physics - as a grad student, i got paid to satisfy my own curiosity. (and for me, as a bonus, got to live at CERN for a few years.) how many people can say that about their job? if you didn't enjoy what you are learning, you can always quit - in fact, you should quit. it's an avenue you chose to pursue - so complaining about it sounds pretty weak.

  55. 16 bit users! That's the future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...16-bit blockheads...

    The users I have to deal with are usually running at about 8 bits ... sometimes 4.

    *sigh*

  56. Re:Absolute WORST job in science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Background, please: Who is Jack Horkheimer and what, exactly, is a "fluffer?"

  57. Work for Bush Administration by macdaddy · · Score: 4, Funny

    What about a science advisor to the Bush Administrator? That's got to be the worst job in science unless you also hold a degree in fair-weather theology.

  58. Dear Slashdotters, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot has been a great way for me to relax and get my mind away from my work. Recently, though, there's been some problems. You see, some fellow Slashdotters are posting here links that are related to my job. So I'll ask you kindly:

    PLEASE STOP POSTING GOATSE.CX LINKS, OR I QUIT MY JOB AS AN ANAL-WART RESEARCHER!

  59. Re: Love that Dirty Water, Boston your my home! by xtermin8 · · Score: 1

    An obscure group from California provides us around the Charles River with a perenial theme song. Anyways up until a couple of years ago people were indeed advised to have a tetnus shot if they happened to fall in. But the river has been cleaned up quite a bit and has recently been declared clean enough (from bacteria) to swim in. Considering the old maze of poorly documented drainage pipes into the Charles from different municipalities, this is quite an accomplishment. So I imagine there's hope for St John's, too!

  60. mod +5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    thanks.

  61. Big Daddy? by Noksagt · · Score: 1

    If you want to post some funny bunk science, why not Big Daddy?

  62. Gallup Poll by Noksagt · · Score: 1

    Here's the report. You can be proud that your anti-evolutionist views are shared by 80% of people with a high school education or less.

  63. Working with sales... by cavac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, in my humble personal world, one of the worst jobs in IT is still working with the sales department to turn their "lie-to-the-customer-a-bit" into something approaching reality.

    And guess what; it's an uphill battle. The more lies you make into working software, the more undoable things are expected from your department. But fail once and you're out of a job.

    --
    Look, this thing is totally safe! Built it myself, you know. You just press that button like this and then turn that lev
  64. Re:Grad student - give me a break!! by Hatta · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I know.. I was just venting, it's been a long weekend. I love what I do, sometimes I just do too much of it. For the record, I do recommend grad school in the sciences to all those young ones out there. It is very rewarding, and I wouldn't choose to do anything else.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  65. K-25 demolition by deblau · · Score: 3, Informative
    I grew up in Oak Ridge. If you think that a building dripping with radiation is bad, check out the Secret City scenic railway. Doesn't seem unusual, until you discover where the station is. For some real giggles, here's an excerpt from the bottom of the page:
    Note: Due to additional security procedures following the events of September 11, 2001, the Secret City Scenic Excursion Train is currently boarding at the back gate of the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP), formerly known as the K-25 facility. This situation will continue until we are advised otherwise by security officials at ETTP.
    Yes, folks, due to heightened security, we're having Joe Public board the train right next to the abandoned nuclear facility. You know, the one with radioactive barrels filled with Uranium scattered willy-nilly out in front.

    Scary as all that sounds, I've actually been on the train ride. It's very pleasant, the rail cars are antiques, and the tour guide's history of Oak Ridge during WWII was interesting. (Checks rad badge again. No problems.)

    It's a shame to see the old girl go down, really. She's done a lot in her time in "Happy Valley". K-25 was at one time the world's largest building. (For a sense of scale, have a look at the two-story townhouses at the bottom of the pic. If you look carefully, you'll see that the two buildings in the center are actually just one building.)

    --
    This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
    1. Re:K-25 demolition by kaszeta · · Score: 1
      K-25 was at one time the world's largest building

      Yeah, that was a pretty big building. I used to work at K-25 (and later at the main Lab's High Flux Isotope Reactor, see some of my other posts), and one year we held a 10K race for plant employees. 10K was 3.5 laps around the K-25 building.

      I've been in the building as well, and it was rather scary, as it had mostly become a warehouse for equipment that was contaminated, Top Secret, or, in most cases both.

      Then again, the whole site was rather creepy, in that half of my office was walled off as having contact radiation contamination, and that when I went to talk with my boss I had to pass two 5 foot square areas chained off with yellow and purple chain while making the 100 foot walk between buildings...

      I should go back and see what they've done with the place now that it's somewhat more public...

  66. Re:the worst "science" job.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup. I've seen some real knockouts who look great without makeup.
    Then there's some women who look like zombies without makeup... yugh. I guess makeup helps those types of women.

  67. Re:Absolute WORST job in science by Phidoux · · Score: 1

    According to my better half, fluff is the "polite form" of fart. So I guess that makes a fluffer a farter? Mmmmm... Applying the same logic, I guess flatter means wet-one?

  68. Rosie O by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    "This post brought to you by Big Rosie O's Clamshack! All you can eat with no hands.... they also have crabs!"

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  69. Re:Absolute WORST job in science by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

    I think your better half is trying to conceal her past.

    Fluffer

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  70. Television Meteorologist by mikey573 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'd have to disagree with the Television Meteorologist listing.

    In New England, most local television news weather forecasts are overseen and reported on air by actual meteorologists, unlike other parts of the country that have untrained "weathermen" (like southern california). In smaller TV markets, or weather is much more stable, or even on radio, you might as well read off government supplied weather forecasts.

    They are well paid for TV. (however if you are not on TV, meteorologists get shafted in terms of pay, unless they work as consultants -- usually environmental consultants dealing with air quality issues.)

    Also, those guys are instant celebrities around these parts.

    Snow predictions are one of the harder predictions to make. These guys basically have to choose between various computer model predictions, and sometime they are far off.

    However, my recommendation is don't trust a forecast longer than 24 hours in advance.

  71. EA GAMES? by nazsco · · Score: 1

    the site seems to be down... so, anyone saw in what position programming at EA GAMES was?

  72. The list has "Scientist". They call it "Crank". by bzipitidoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The way the article defines crank, they might as well have said "the worst job in science is doing science". There's potential for acrimony even in what would seem to be the most obscure, boring and straightforward areas. In a better world, most everyone would be objective about research and results, and reserved in judgement. We would not cling to preconceived notions, and not knowingly squelch unfinished research we don't "like", argue unfairly and fallaciously, apply 3rd degree methods, and use other stupid and dirty tricks in support. We can back down if we can admit we were wrong, and can convince ourselves that wrong != stupid. But too often, when something is researched, we suddenly discover that we have opinions about it, and that our opinions come with baggage. Even on research where we have no stake in the matter and have not troubled to inform themselves even a tiny bit, we've got an opinion. Congressional science advisors and school science teachers are treated much the same as "cranks", except that instead of the opposition being mostly heartfelt and even occasionally fair and rational, the opposition is usually a lot of smoke meant to distract and keep a hidden agenda hidden. But that's the breaks in science. When experimental results are not in agreement with popular thinking, shouldn't go with poll results over scientific results. I trust that improvements will continue and someday, that better world will arrive.

    --
    Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
  73. Creationist Preacher by gelfling · · Score: 1

    I mean this IS George Bush's Amurrica and Creationism is being taught now INSTEAD of science.....All I'm sayin.

  74. A Real Life Example of how bad it is getting by kpogoda · · Score: 1

    No cure in sight for nurses' strike The four-month-old walkout at Lourdes Medical Center is at an impasse. Both sides say they remain determined. By Frank Kummer Inquirer Staff Writer It is no surprise to their union that nurses who walked off the job at Lourdes Medical Center of Burlington County more than four months ago are still picketing this Labor Day. Shortly before the union's two-year contract expired at the end of February, its leaders showed the nurses video of a similar hospital strike that lasted two years. They wanted the nurses to know they would need resolve. The labor action remains bitter, with no negotiations scheduled since talks broke down early last month. The Willingboro hospital has hired permanent replacement workers, and as many as half the striking nurses are working other jobs to help support themselves or their families. As the strike drags on, union representatives say that maintaining big pickets has become harder, but that nurses are determined nonetheless. "We have been staffing the lines during rush hour," Pierre Joanis, a negotiator for JNESO, said Friday afternoon when no nurses were picketing. "The pickets have dried up some because so many have found other jobs." One sign at a hospital entrance on Sunset Road read: "Friends don't let friends work at Lourdes." About 80 of the 280 nurses who walked off the job April 19 have crossed the lines to work, Joanis said. About a dozen of those have resigned or been fired, he said. About half the nurses honoring the picket line have found supplementary or full-time work elsewhere, Joanis said. Other health-care facilities have been recruiting them because of a nationwide nursing shortage. A central issue in the dispute is a management push for contract language that would allow it to change nurses' schedules as it saw fit for flexibility. Nurses say that would be a giant step backward and alter their lifestyle and finances because some of the changes would mean three 12-hour shifts instead of five eight-hour shifts - a loss of four hours a week and full-time status. Indeed, nurses began fomenting resentment almost a year ago under the last contract when the hospital began making shift changes and laying off workers. Few talks were held after the nurses walked out. Negotiations stopped Aug. 10 when both sides agreed they had reached an impasse. The hospital said it had given its last offer. Scott Share, a hospital spokesman, said Friday afternoon that no new talks were scheduled. Both sides are awaiting rulings on several issues under arbitration. In the middle of last month, an arbitrator sided with the nurses on shift changes, but the ruling is unlikely to have an effect on the walkout. The union has filed a grievance with the National Labor Relations Board, contending that management had no right to hire permanent replacements. So far, union officials said, the hospital has hired about 12 replacements. Management said it had to act because the high pay rates for temporary replacements were a financial strain. It also maintained that the National Labor Relations Act permits the move. So both sides said they were dug in for the long haul. "We will be there for the fight and engage them every step of the way," Joanis said.

  75. That's... by abulafia · · Score: 1

    ...a person who supports Liberachi for President, I believe.

    --
    I forget what 8 was for.
  76. Fiancee's mother is a math teacher... by purduephotog · · Score: 1

    ... and these kids are failing in a *good* school. She tells stories of how the mentally deficient children are assigned ALL of the tutors to help educate them to standardized levels.

    You know who misses out on this? The normal, non gifted non slow children. They 'pass' enough on their own, so they don't qualify for tutors. The gifted ones excell on their own, and don't need the tutors.

    Instead all of the monies are spent on bringing up 'special ed' for mainstreaming purposes.

    Just grand.

    Homeschooling starts to sound more and more like a viable choice.

    (yes I have degrees in chemistry and chemical engineering because I love science)

  77. Wal Mart? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I first scanned this, I saw "Anal Wart Researcher" as "Wal Mart Researcher". Freudian slip I guess.

  78. 40 hour weeks by autechre · · Score: 1

    What you say about 80 hour weeks is interesting. My mom's been a physician's assistant for years, and just recently got out of emergency medicine and into something a lot slower paced. When she was working in the ER, 30 hours a week was considered to be "full time" for the purpose of benefits, etc. due to the fact that the job was so stressful.

    --
    WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
  79. ob. Simpsons by pragma_x · · Score: 1
    Rosanne Barr's gynecologist
    My eyes...the goggles do nothing!
  80. Re:Absolute WORST job in science by emurphy42 · · Score: 1
    Who is Jack Horkheimer
    Google is your friend.
    and what, exactly, is a "fluffer?"
    As previously noted, Wikipedia is your friend.
  81. NO NO NO... by alamandrax · · Score: 1

    ...they were nucular

    --
    'tis but a scratch.