all 17 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 40 points 1 year ago (2 children)

He also got hilariously lucky in what he was doing. It's worth a read into the modern-day reproductions (no pun intended) of his work to see just how unlikely he was to get his results as fast as he did.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Have you got any links? A quick search didn't show up anything in that direction, only how important Mendel was for modern genetics...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I believe he cooked his data, but it was the 1850s, and science was still along these lines:

    Watson, do you think a monkey falling out of a tree falls slower or faster than one blown out of a tree with 00 buckshot?

    I do say, Alfred, what an intriguing idea. I'll grab the shotgun and you find a rock. We will meet back here in 15 minutes and find two monkeys.

    15 minutes later
    Alright, on the count of three, you throw the rock at your money and I'll pull my trigger

    But it's going to take time for the rock to get there - your shotgun is instant

    Fine you throw on two, and I pull on three. Ready? One, two...

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    There is a German word for this: ErbsenzΓ€hler (pea counter), someone who is overly rigerous, exact or cheap.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • I don't know where I read/listen it, but I have the memory of learning that he wanted to use rats for his experiments but the church didn't wanted to pay for the rats so he has to do it with peas.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    I went to college for horticulture four years ago. They still use this confusing rhetoric.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Why does this guy look like Doug Heffernan lol

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Ok, now try with hawkweed.

  • source