[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 38 KB, 500x628, george_costanza006.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4798305 No.4798305 [Reply] [Original]

Ok /sci/, here's a challenge:

1) Name 15 male scientists...

2) Name 15 female scientists...

...who contributed something ground-breaking/important to science.

>> No.4798309

Emmy Noether

>> No.4798315

Marie Curie

>> No.4798318
File: 26 KB, 400x390, 1337620330566.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4798318

This will clearly turn into a sexist trollfest, so I will just be making this one post.
You will be expecting people to easily name the 15 men, and have a lot of difficulty naming the 15 women.
Then you will claim women are worse at science, and men have contributed far more.

Typical sexist trollthread.

>> No.4798319

Lise Meitner

>> No.4798325

Madame Wu

>> No.4798326

Charlene Werner

>> No.4798327

>>4798309
>>4798315
>>4798319
In one post you stupid fucks.

>> No.4798332

>>4798318
Yes, I'm the OP and that's my intention.

I couldn't name 15 female scientists.

>> No.4798333

>>4798327
Don't be so mad.

>> No.4798336
File: 26 KB, 400x389, 1337620476891.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4798336

And in case you are wondering, since the feminism movement came about and women have been entitled to a fair shot at education along with men, we have been inventing things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_Nobel_laureates

>> No.4798345
File: 85 KB, 178x188, 1338399017779.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4798345

wimmin r bad at sceince

>> No.4798354

>>4798336
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/Female_nobel_laureates_2011.png

lol

>> No.4798348
File: 323 KB, 503x321, 856432.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4798348

http://www.women-inventors.com/

>> No.4798350

>>4798318
Fair is fair: let's make it 10 of the last, say, 50 years? 5 of the last 30?

I'd still come up with 5 men easily and have trouble after the first couple of women, most of whom I'd know because they happen to work at my university. I don't think that makes me sexist.

>> No.4798363

>>4798336
But women stopped being productive in real science acording to that graphic >>4798354

>> No.4798365
File: 21 KB, 310x205, 1339574844780.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4798365

>>4798354
Fine, there are more of them that are men, than are women.
This is not surprising.

Look back after a few decades have passed, and you will see that it is far more balanced, I think.

>> No.4798373

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_Nobel_laureates


I see not one female scientist who did something in the field of math. Mostely bullshit like literature or peace...

>> No.4798374

>>4798336
>since the feminism movement came about and women have been entitled to a fair shot at education along with men
Let's see then...

2011:
10 male Nobel laureates
3 female Nobel laureates (for women's rights)
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/lists/2009.html?year=2011

>> No.4798370

>>4798365
Shut up, EK.

>> No.4798372
File: 47 KB, 500x416, 1340150590111.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4798372

0/100

http://www.physics.ucla.edu/~cwp/


\thread

>> No.4798381

>>4798373
Have you looked in the section about the nobel prize for mathematics?

>> No.4798378
File: 981 KB, 499x499, tumblr_m2j2miCe9V1qg39ewo1_500.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4798378

>>4798373
>math
>nobel prize

>> No.4798380

>>4798374
CHECKMATE ATHEISTS!

Women -5 : 39293429023 Men

>> No.4798383

>>4798370
I am not EK.

>> No.4798384

It's good to have a superior male brain and mind (and body!).

>> No.4798387

>>4798378
Regardless of the ignorance, the point stands as there's no female field medalists.

>> No.4798388

>>4798374
but:
"for their non-violent struggle for the safety of women and for women’s rights to full participation in peace-building work"

lel

>> No.4798389

>>4798305
http://www.ekgclasses.org/15-female-scientists-who-changed-the-world/

Google is your friend. Also you don't hear about them because http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120508142622.htm

>> No.4798386

>>4798383
Yes, you are.

>> No.4798392

>>4798389
>Social Studies of Science (published by SAGE) reveals that when men chair committees that select scientific awards recipients, males win the awards more than 95% of the time

LOL

Checkmate again.

>> No.4798391

>>4798386
No I am not.
I do not care what you believe, and EK is not the only woman on /sci/.

>> No.4798394

>>4798391
>I do not care what you believe,
Then why did you reply?

>and EK is not the only woman on /sci/.
There is no evidence for other women posting on this board.

>> No.4798401

>>4798381
I luled unless you really are unaware there is no such prize. Still, to my knowledge, there is no female Fields Laureate. I just say that as a point of fact, I disagree with the premise that women are stupid, for there are cultural reasons they've been denied education for a long while around the world. I'm a mathematics phd program and the women are every bit as good as the men, and in equal proportion. Hell, in some ways I'd say they're even better, especially at being organized about their work schedule and completing assignments on time. If I've noticed any difference though, I'd say they're a little less creative or inquisitive about the material compared to the guys. But I don't think that's as extreme as saying they're all morons. In the upper eschelons of science and math no one gives a shit about stuff like this, it's prols that can only see things from afar.

>> No.4798402
File: 532 KB, 2045x1506, 1329785207087.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4798402

>>4798392
>males win the awards more than 95% of the time
>males win the awards more than 95%

>only 5% are women

>> No.4798404

Does my tulpa count? She's a scientist.

>> No.4798412

Name 15 male serial killers.
Name 15 female serial killers.
LOL men are violent and dumb.

>> No.4798408

>>4798404
>...who contributed something ground-breaking/important to science.

So no.

>> No.4798415

>>4798412
I agree that we are more violent, but not dumb.
What does being a serial killer have to do with being dumb?

>> No.4798425

>>4798415
The assumption is that an intelligent individual would realize that murdering people is probably not a good idea because the legal system is just going to a) lock them up or b) execute them.

>> No.4798437

>>4798305
your using a logical fallacy.

let me demonstrate this to you.

name 15 males that live in america
name 15 females that live in america

i can name 15 males but not 15 females

ergo more males must live in america than females this is obviously false.

>> No.4798438

>>4798425
A stupid serial killer would not get away with it.
One would have to be at least slightly intelligent to successfully hide their tracks.

Also, the death penalty is not common nowadays.

>> No.4798439

>>4798425
Most of them don't care or have a mental disorder, but I bet many serial killers had high or average IQ.

>> No.4798440

>>4798437
Yes, but there actually are more male scientists.
However, this does not mean that women are more stupid, it just means that less of them have the desire and the opportunity to be successful scientists.

>> No.4798450

>>4798437
?
I can name 15 and more females living in America, your argument is invalid.

>> No.4798473

>>4798415
We are violent simians.

>> No.4798493

Christiane Nusslein-Vollhard