Fascinating Male/Female Genes
Discussion
Amazing science:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4355355.stm
I've always wondered why most of history's geniuses have been men, now I suspect it is a combination of the effects described by the article and the social superiority (in the sense that women weren't encouraged to do 'men's' things such as science, mathematics, etc.
) of men historically, rather than just the latter as I had previously imagined.
Also fascinating about the higher susceptibility of men to mental retardation (
perhaps that's why it isn't called womental retardation? *groan*) and certain classes of disease.
Of course, someone at some point is going to do the same thing for different races, then we'll have modern-day Nazis sprouting from the woodwork or a Gattaca-like future!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4355355.stm
I've always wondered why most of history's geniuses have been men, now I suspect it is a combination of the effects described by the article and the social superiority (in the sense that women weren't encouraged to do 'men's' things such as science, mathematics, etc.
) of men historically, rather than just the latter as I had previously imagined. Also fascinating about the higher susceptibility of men to mental retardation (
perhaps that's why it isn't called womental retardation? *groan*) and certain classes of disease. Of course, someone at some point is going to do the same thing for different races, then we'll have modern-day Nazis sprouting from the woodwork or a Gattaca-like future!
Julianna Kettlewell needs a spank because she hasn't done her research thoroughly enough.
I won't even start as there are so many errors in that script.
The BBC need some proper scientists on the case, they are recruiting more and more primary school teachers, it seems. Every day which passes, I become more and more ashamed to be a scientist. Science is a bloody shambles and it's largely due to the crap standard of education. This sort of rubbish makes me go ugggg!
Honestly, you pay BBC enough, they should employ decent people who can come up.....rant, rant, I should go and bury my head in the sand,
>> Edited by love machine on Thursday 17th March 01:00
I won't even start as there are so many errors in that script.
The BBC need some proper scientists on the case, they are recruiting more and more primary school teachers, it seems. Every day which passes, I become more and more ashamed to be a scientist. Science is a bloody shambles and it's largely due to the crap standard of education. This sort of rubbish makes me go ugggg!
Honestly, you pay BBC enough, they should employ decent people who can come up.....rant, rant, I should go and bury my head in the sand,
>> Edited by love machine on Thursday 17th March 01:00
love machine said:
Julianna Kettlewell needs a spank because she hasn't done her research thoroughly enough.
I won't even start as there are so many errors in that script.
The BBC need some proper scientists on the case, they are recruiting more and more primary school teachers, it seems. Every day which passes, I become more and more ashamed to be a scientist. Science is a bloody shambles and it's largely due to the crap standard of education. This sort of rubbish makes me go ugggg!
Honestly, you pay BBC enough, they should employ decent people who can come up.....rant, rant, I should go and bury my head in the sand,
>> Edited by love machine on Thursday 17th March 01:00
I agree a lot of the 'scientific' studies done these days seem to be about stuff that they can add in news snippets, basically pointless crap often sponsored by some interest, like all the tests you hea about beer being good for you sponsored by, suprise, suprise, a beer company.
Aren't there a number of diseases they should be finding a cure for?
vixpy1 said:
Women can have Multiple Organisms.. .
So vixpy which organisms do they have. Is it like some moss, an amoeba, maybe a tapeworm?
He gets so excited, he does! I'm sure you meant orgasms didn't you? No offense ladies we mean no harm.
>> Edited by Trooper2 on Thursday 17th March 05:01
There was some professor of harvard-who has got into trouble over something similar-but an opposite opinion.
I take it we have all heard of the bell curve which shows a typical distribution of income etc.
In the case of men their scientific ability is slightly higher on average-so that the average man is only very slightly better than the average woman. However because the bell curve is then slightly to the right for men a far graeter number fall into the top end of the scale-ie those who reach the top in science.
I take it we have all heard of the bell curve which shows a typical distribution of income etc.
In the case of men their scientific ability is slightly higher on average-so that the average man is only very slightly better than the average woman. However because the bell curve is then slightly to the right for men a far graeter number fall into the top end of the scale-ie those who reach the top in science.
Gazboy said:
I've also read:
Men's brain cells die three times faster than women's.
Men's hearing heads downhill faster than women's.
Could the former be alcohol related, and the latter due to louder ocupations?
louder occupations being listening to women?
ducks and runs for cover
roadsweeper said:
I've also read:
Men's brain cells die three times faster than women's.
Men's hearing heads downhill faster than women's.
Come on Roz, a bit of balance - some positives about blokes or negatives about women. I sometimes suspect you're anit-men.
Some positives about blokes...
I love men!
Well, not the arrogant ugly ones!
Particularly if they're 5'11" and over!Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff