Scientists' Success Or Failure Correlated With Beer
mernil sends in an article from the NYTimes that casts a glance at a study done in the Czech Republic (natch) on what divides the successful scientists from the duffers. "Ever since there have been scientists, there have been those who are wildly successful, publishing one well-received paper after another, and those who are not. And since nearly the same time, there have been scholars arguing over what makes the difference. What is it that turns one scientist into more of a Darwin and another into more of a dud? After years of argument over the roles of factors like genius, sex, and dumb luck, a new study shows that something entirely unexpected and considerably sudsier may be at play in determining the success or failure of scientists — beer."
But in no way does this explain the teetotaling creation science type scientists.
Goatse
You nerd faggots love it.
But in no way does this explain the teetotaling creation science type scientists.
Some of those people are clearly leaders in their field, it's just that their chosen field has a lot more to do with creation than science.
when he said in his closing statements of "An Inconvenient Truth" that China was on the forefront of fighting global warming. Look and see for yourself.
http://apnews.myway.com/image/20080318/APTOPIX_China_Olympics.sff_XHG102_20080318003043.html?date=20080318&docid=D8VG3QDG0
Now THAT'S an inconvenient truth. Hey, wasn't the Clinton administration accused of accepting campaign dollars from sources with ties to the Chinese government? And then this Norman Hsu guy pops up and starts raising money for Hillary from Chinese immigrants working hand-to-mouth jobs. That sure is odd...