ITT

[Anonymous No.11316314]

We celebrate the great contributions women have made to science.

[Anonymous No.11316318]

>>11316314
>tfw no noether gf

[Anonymous No.11316327]

>>11316314
>We celebrate the great contributions women have made to science.
the births of great male scientists

[Anonymous No.11316336]

>>11316314
I'm waiting.

[Anonymous No.11316339]

Threads made in bad-faith do not belong on this board.

[Anonymous No.11316343]

>>11316314
feminist theory

[Anonymous No.11316352]

>>11316339
>in bad-faith
implying

[Anonymous No.11316364]

>>11316352
You are transparent to anyone not autistic

[Anonymous No.11316369]

>>11316364
>you
learn how the poster count function works and if you are that ass-blasted by the thread then derail it by posting women who made great contributions to science. i don't think you will and instead you are going to moan amd cry which is why i said
>implying

[Anonymous No.11316817]

They birthed and raised almost all of the greatest scientists to have ever lived.
Would science or civilisation even be possible without good mothers?

[Anonymous No.11316853]

>>11316817
Gauss's mother was an illiterate retard. Banach's mother was a stupid harlot. Most achievements of scientists and mathematicians are attributable to rare mutations and chance

[Anonymous No.11316855]

>>11316817
based

[Anonymous No.11316858]

>>11316853
t. brainlet

[Anonymous No.11316881]

>>11316314
They make composition possible.

[Anonymous No.11316883]

>>11316817
>Would science or civilisation even be possible without good mothers?
Or without chicken tendies?

[Anonymous No.11316892]

>>11316883
What is a "chicken tendies"?

[Anonymous No.11316903]

>>11316892
The tendency to be a chicken.

[Anonymous No.11316934]

>>11316858
everything I said was true, literally nothing in one's upbringing other than severely negative health outcomes contributes to intelligence. you could throw a genius child in a work camp for 18 years and they'd still come out totally superior to most of the population intellectually. loving your mother is fine, thank her for her genes not for how she raised you if your only reason for doing so is what you've accomplished

[Anonymous No.11316971]

>>11316369
>trolling outside of /b/

[Anonymous No.11317078]

>>11316971
>can't name one (1) contribution women have made to science
>gets mad at other people for exposing his ignorance

[Anonymous No.11317143]

>>11316934
You could throw a genius child into a cave and he'll be totally retarded by the time he's grown up.

[Anonymous No.11317161]

>>11316934
it's not being superior intellectualy which makes the difference in the long term.
It's being superior financially.

There are genius children in work camps right now who will never accomplish anything lasting because they don't have the financial resources and societal freedoms to do so.

[Anonymous No.11317180]

>>11316314
Astrolabes, hydrometers (Hypatia)
Coding (Ada Lovelace)
Black Holes (Katie Bouman)

[Anonymous No.11317189]

>>11316314
Giving birth to men

[Anonymous No.11317207]

We celebrate Newton, leibniz, Kepler, darwin, bohr and many others great males weren't aborted
>that's how females contributing to science

[Anonymous No.11317209]

Like it or not, in a hypersexual society women are the future. They can still work and be productive after having sex. A man cannot be.

[Anonymous No.11317210]

>>11317078
>pointing out idiotic and lame trolling is the same as being mad
>attack strawman

[Anonymous No.11317226]

>>11317209
they can't even work or be productive BEFORE having sex, let alone afterwards when they're pregnant

[Anonymous No.11317231]

How atypical was this woman? Also i heard Einstiens wife did some of his math.

[Anonymous No.11317233]

>>11317231
Forgot pic

[Anonymous No.11317266]

>>11317210
Despite your crying you have still to list a single contribution women have made to science. Other people in the very same thread haven't had that issue.

[Anonymous No.11317270]

>>11317180
>Coding (Ada Lovelace)
Is this bait?

[Anonymous No.11317274]

>>11317143
Nah just feral, they’d still be outperforming their peers after you resocialized them. Put the dumb kids in a school for the gifted they would wash out or lag behind permanently.
>>11317161
Unlikely, genius is very rare and mostly concentrated among middle class families.

[Anonymous No.11317420]

They take scientists' virginity so they don't become incels

[Anonymous No.11317425]

>>11317420
This is a negative some of the highest IQ men in history have been in and/or volcel.

[Anonymous No.11317489]

>>11317266
I like how you just ignored my post fag.
>Marie Curie became the first woman to win a Nobel Prize and the first person — man or woman — to win the award twice. With her husband Pierre Curie, Marie's efforts led to the discovery of polonium and radium and, after Pierre's death, the further development of X-rays. The famed scientist died in 1934 of aplastic anemia likely caused by exposure to radiation.

[Anonymous No.11317495]

>>11316318
I can testify that she is a great mathematician, but that she is a woman, I cannot swear.

[Anonymous No.11317605]

>>11317489
>Ctrl F
>Marie
>2/2
>all in this post
lmao. You didn't post anything trannycel you started seething. Well done on finally contributing the only woman 50 IQ mouthbreathers can think of when they think of female scientists.

[Anonymous No.11317800]

>>11317605
I guess /sci/ is just a shitposting board after all. This place used to have standards.

[Anonymous No.11317804]

>>11316318
Looks like an absolute chaddette

[Anonymous No.11318518]

>>11316369
>learn how the poster count function works and if you are that ass-blasted by the thread then derail it by posting women who made great contributions to science
This is a +15 years oldfag for sure. Solid post.

[Solivagus No.11318523]

>>11316314
Okay.

Women contributed Men, and Men contributed Silence.

>The End

[Anonymous No.11318532]

>>11317180
Ada lovelace was proven time and again to be a conartist. Grace hopper on the other hand...

[Anonymous No.11318794]

>>11317266
I'm not crying, I'm saying you're a whining little bitch who tries trolling for the first time.
You've proven me correct a few times already in this thread.

[Anonymous No.11319478]

>>11316903
Amusing post

[Anonymous No.11319737]

>>11317233
>tfw you have to go to Oslo... AGAIN
baka

[Anonymous No.11319741]

>outliers vs averages
On average women better serve as nurturers of talent as their sons are more expendable.

[Anonymous No.11319970]

>I'm not crying, I'm saying you're a whining little bitch who tries trolling for the first time.
>You've proven me correct a few times already in this thread

[Anonymous No.11320210]

>>11317274
>Nah just feral, they’d still be outperforming their peers after you resocialized them. Put the dumb kids in a school for the gifted they would wash out or lag behind permanently.
Lol you're retarded. You think cavemen are as smart as us.

[Anonymous No.11320236]

>>11317180
I keked, normies will think you are on their side

[Anonymous No.11320244]

You don't belong to this board if you don't know what this is.

[Anonymous No.11320247]

>>11320210
cavemen needed a certain level of smarts and would be hard selected for it, those cave paintings took high skill to draw.

[Anonymous No.11320249]

Hi! Few things to start off with =] 1. Yes I added you because you're a female scientist, 'tis an awesome thing to see! 2. I'm Anon. 3. Don't be intimidated, but I'm not a stereotypical guy. If anything, I'll be the one in the kitchen =D.

Emmy Noether
Marie Curie

These are just the pop/sci/ ones off the top of my had. Look into the history of any subject and you'll find quite a few competent femalesn

[Anonymous No.11320257]

>>11320244
>glorified lab tech took a picture
Rosalind Franklin is the worst person you could pick to show women can contribute to science desu. Stop pushing this meme and take the Noetherpill

[Anonymous No.11320265]

>>11320257
>>glorified lab tech
she is a a legit physico-chemist, anon.

[Anonymous No.11320267]

>>11320257
>>glorified lab tech
Wasn't she a Uni teacher?

[Anonymous No.11320284]

>>11320249
How do you add someone on 4chan?

[Anonymous No.11320288]

>>11320284
Just press the friend request button next to my profile picture.

[Anonymous No.11320919]

>>11320265
That's what he said.

[Anonymous No.11320921]

>>11320249
>and you'll find quite a few competent femalesn
This is true. The real problem isn't the lack of competent women, it's that the competent ones are constantly overshadowed by incompetent ones because bolstering a muh science muh wahmyn is good PR, but finding a competent one rather than just another one is hard (the same is true for finding competent men, but since there are so many more men than women in any technical field, it's just easier to find a competent one by simple absolute numbers).

[Anonymous No.11320922]

>>11320267
Many uni teachers are glorified lab techs. Your point?

[Anonymous No.11320938]

>>11320921
The west is obsessed with progress but is too lazy ot go about it, so instead we prop up incompetent people and scream that they're competent until we're blue in the face.

[Anonymous No.11321012]

>>11320938
Not really. The problem is that marketing and science are at odds. The former acts on impressions and timing, the latter works on patience and complex formal underpinnings. Yet, science depends on marketing (that's how you get funding), but not the other way around.

[Anonymous No.11322178]

>>11320249
>Marie Curie
Also her daughter got a Nobel Prize in Physics.

[Anonymous No.11322894]

They spread their legs for geniuses that get world wide attention insuring traits that create geniuses get passed on.

[Anonymous No.11324535]

>>11316318
dress it up in a suit and youd be convinced it was a man. if this is the best you can get of a woman, then im not sure your case is very good that women are notable in science/math

>>11316327
>>11316853
based

>>11316339
cope

>>11320244
>>11320265
>>11320267
oh yeah thats the image that was taken by a male graduate student which was thereafter credited falsibly to his supervisor roslaind frankjew.

[Anonymous No.11324549]

>>11324535

based

[Anonymous No.11324597]

>>11316883
> nervous face, body is completely still, tail violently wags

[Anonymous No.11324710]

>>11319970
kek, you can't even hit "quote" correctly. Are tears hindering your vision or are you just shaking so hard?

[Anonymous No.11324726]

>>11316339
>Threads made in bad-faith
What do you mean?

[Anonymous No.11324781]

>>11316314
i heard that the women of epstein island have made some contributions to science if you know what i iykwim

[Anonymous No.11324790]

>>11318532
this is what i don't understand. why do radfem retards bang on about lovelace who isn't worthy of being a footnote in the history of computing when there is grace hopper? they never seem to even mention her.

[Anonymous No.11324862]

>>11316853
Cope harder, retard

[Anonymous No.11325633]

>>11324790
I think it's because it's easier to push an already recognized icon than to create a new icon, coupled with the fact radfems both don't ACTUALLY care and don't actually know anything. It's like the usual comic strip, picrel.

[Anonymous No.11325681]

What is the count? Like half a dozen and half of those are jokes. Come on guys! I wanlearn something.
>>11316853
Yeah, all the really smart dudes I know have negligent whore mothers or no mother at all.

[Anonymous No.11325870]

>>11325681
Most of them are jokes because there are too few people overall to name a sufficiently large amount of women in specific as meaningful (because we have to therefore automatically eliminate all non-STEM disciplines which removes 99% of women graduates from the potential pool). It's a numbers' game and women are not winning it. It's a simple evolutionary consequence of women wanting to be mothers and carrying the kid for 9 months and such, most of them just don't have the drive to do both that and groundbreaking research.
We may name 100 phenomenal men, but that discounts their billions of contemporaries that we have never heard of and mostly didn't amount to anything.

[Anonymous No.11325877]

>>11325870
>but that discounts their billions of contemporaries that we have never heard of and mostly didn't amount to anything.

many of whom were equally if not more accomplished than most of their female scientist colleagues who get media attention and long wiki pages desu. if a woman is above average/on the level of a talented but forgettable male = she's a genius. feminism of this sort is cancer

[Anonymous No.11325884]

>>11325877
>many of whom were equally if not more accomplished than most of their female scientist colleagues who get media attention and long wiki pages desu.
Absolutely, but I don't think that's women's fault.

[Anonymous No.11326014]

>>11324535
>oh yeah thats the image that was taken by a male graduate student which was thereafter credited falsibly to his supervisor roslaind frankjew.
>falsibly
That's how credit works in academia, anon. The lab techs and grad students don't get credit for the PI's project.

[Anonymous No.11326042]

>>11326014
I dont care how "academia works." All I care about here is that she never took any damn photo and thus has ZERO right to the nobel prize. simple as that.

[Anonymous No.11326054]

>>11326042
But that goes both ways. Many male or female lab techs and researchers (including post-docs) did shit and their PIs got the credit for it, including nobel prizes, field medals, turing prizes and more.

[Anonymous No.11326120]

>>11326054
its hilarious how you dont see the irony in this post. Also, I dont care about any other scenarios, we are restricting ourselves to this dead lady. As for other garbage, women dont even stay to work as many hours as man so i doubt they actually have discovered anything let alone had that stolen from them buy an evil boogey man

[Anonymous No.11326127]

>>11326120
>its hilarious how you dont see the irony in this post.
Then point it out.
>As for other garbage, women dont even stay to work as many hours as man so i doubt they actually have discovered anything let alone had that stolen from them buy an evil boogey man
*yawn*

[Anonymous No.11326130]

>11326127
Im genuinely curious, are you a woman or a homosexual by any chance? also, yawn isnt an argument

[Anonymous No.11326138]

>>11326130
I accept your surrender.

[Anonymous No.11326147]

>>11326138
the irony was that you make the many females were cheated out of their discoveries by men but in this case you will argue conversely because the sex is reversed. now thats a defeat if Ive ever seen one

[Anonymous No.11326149]

>>11326147
make the argument that*

[Anonymous No.11326156]

>>11326147
That's nowhere in any of my posts. I think you should go back to >>>/pol/ with your hallucinatory spooks, before you embarrass yourself again.

[Anonymous No.11326172]

>>11326156
back to >>>/r*ddit/ with your soi arguments

[Anonymous No.11327399]

Have you all forgotten the famous Ms. Kiesler??

[Anonymous No.11327403]

>>11324726
Are you by chance autistic?

[Anonymous No.11327916]

>>11327403
Where do you think we are?

[Anonymous No.11328578]

>>11326156

[Anonymous No.11328599]

>>11324535
thanks for feeding newfags some truthpills, someone needed to do it

[Anonymous No.11328611]

>>11317233
This looks like a man.

[Anonymous No.11330341]

>>11324535
>credited falsibly
Cite??

[Anonymous No.11330362]

>>11330341
Read the thread, he just doesn't know how academia works (though to his credit, that part of academia among many others is just wrong and should have never been a thing).

[Anonymous No.11331278]

>>11330341
she never made any contribution to the discovery or taking of the photo. she was just a leech

[Anonymous No.11331306]

Staying on topic... I'll add Barbara McClintock.