Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Fifteen sexy scientists. You'd help them titrate   (commonsenseatheism.com ) divider line
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

19339 clicks; posted to Geek » on 19 Jul 2010 at 4:38 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



131 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2010-07-18 08:00:51 PM  
I like that one on the dinosaur. SExxxxxxxxxay!

.
 
2010-07-18 08:08:28 PM  
commonsenseatheism.com

not sure if serious
 
2010-07-18 08:13:54 PM  
www.jsg.utexas.edu

not sure if serious
 
2010-07-18 08:19:40 PM  
Serena Kamber, hospital scientist

O_O *whoa*
 
2010-07-18 08:22:14 PM  
No Amy Mainzer?

FAIL.
 
2010-07-18 08:24:44 PM  

bongmiester: not sure if serious


That one is true.
 
2010-07-18 08:26:16 PM  
Wow. Read all of the comments. The level of butthurt that someone would DARE post a list of sexy FEMALE scientists is amazing.
 
2010-07-18 08:28:48 PM  

Some Bass Playing Guy: Wow. Read all of the comments. The level of butthurt that someone would DARE post a list of sexy FEMALE scientists is amazing.


lolwut?
 
2010-07-18 08:33:59 PM  
img2.timeinc.net

"I'm totally a Nuclear Scientist. I research atoms and like other stuff."
 
2010-07-18 08:43:05 PM  
The atheist list is even hotter.
 
2010-07-18 08:43:18 PM  

Some Bass Playing Guy: Wow. Read all of the comments. The level of butthurt that someone would DARE post a list of sexy FEMALE scientists is amazing.


Heh. The comments on his hot atheists post are equally insipid.

Apparently common-sense atheism involves filling your vagina up with lots of sand.
 
2010-07-18 08:48:30 PM  
jekxrb: The atheist list is even hotter.

I'll be in my bunk.
 
2010-07-18 09:13:54 PM  
I am amazed they were able to shorten that list to anything below 9000. I guess they must only know 15.
 
2010-07-18 09:18:21 PM  
I once met a German Particle Physicist who looked exactly like the hot blond from Lethal Weapon 2.

No shiat, EXACTLY. Had a great personality too.

/Was engaged.
//farking world.
 
2010-07-18 09:33:54 PM  

Makh: I am amazed they were able to shorten that list to anything below 9000.


i27.tinypic.com
What? 9000?
 
2010-07-18 09:34:43 PM  
I sense, in this link, an attempt to start a troll thread.
 
2010-07-18 09:36:34 PM  

BackAssward: I once met a German Particle Physicist who looked exactly like the hot blond from Lethal Weapon 2.


It's just been revoked!
 
2010-07-18 09:37:55 PM  
If thats the best list they can come up with, then I weep for my profession.
 
2010-07-18 10:07:15 PM  
Drew, it's your site and you're free to do what you like with it. This is one of my favorite places on the 'nets. But as a feminist, I am disappointed when one group I care strongly about marginalizes the other.

We are all attracted to human forms of some kind and there's nothing wrong with that. For me, the problem with a post like this is that, rather than celebrate human sexuality, it reinforces the cultural notion that women are valueless (regardless of career choice or ideological stance) unless they conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness.

If you enjoy looking at these women, that's fine. But posting this shows a disrespect to your female readership by exhibiting willful blindness to the hardships they face in being taken seriously in academic pursuits. You could have gotten around that by being more inclusive.
 
2010-07-18 10:15:41 PM  

Some Bass Playing Guy: Wow. Read all of the comments. The level of butthurt that someone would DARE post a list of sexy FEMALE scientists is amazing.


As a female physics grad student I agree. That and we should post a list of hot male scientists to offend everyone and appease the females (because hey, that works for me).
 
2010-07-18 10:27:13 PM  

missmarsha: Drew, it's your site and you're free to do what you like with it. This is one of my favorite places on the 'nets. But as a feminist, I am disappointed when one group I care strongly about marginalizes the other.

We are all attracted to human forms of some kind and there's nothing wrong with that. For me, the problem with a post like this is that, rather than celebrate human sexuality, it reinforces the cultural notion that women are valueless (regardless of career choice or ideological stance) unless they conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness.

If you enjoy looking at these women, that's fine. But posting this shows a disrespect to your female readership by exhibiting willful blindness to the hardships they face in being taken seriously in academic pursuits. You could have gotten around that by being more inclusive.


Obligatory you sound fat, etc...

But seriously - well first, Drew didn't make the list so I'd suggest that this would be better aimed at the author of the site. And secondly, I'd actually suggest there is more of an argument of reverse discrimination between physical attractiveness and scientific fields. I had to read the cheerleader pictured twice when I saw "rocket scientist" listed, not because I didn't think a lady could be rocket scientist, but I was surprised that someone who looked as hot as she does would be a rocket scientist.

And on top of that, there exists a stereotype wherein people think that hot girls have it easier than guys and less attactive girls because of their looks, and thereby are less qualified. "I can't get anyone to take me seriously because they think I've got where I am because of my boobs and not my brains".
 
2010-07-18 10:34:08 PM  

OldScotch: missmarsha: Drew, it's your site and you're free to do what you like with it. This is one of my favorite places on the 'nets. But as a feminist, I am disappointed when one group I care strongly about marginalizes the other.

We are all attracted to human forms of some kind and there's nothing wrong with that. For me, the problem with a post like this is that, rather than celebrate human sexuality, it reinforces the cultural notion that women are valueless (regardless of career choice or ideological stance) unless they conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness.

If you enjoy looking at these women, that's fine. But posting this shows a disrespect to your female readership by exhibiting willful blindness to the hardships they face in being taken seriously in academic pursuits. You could have gotten around that by being more inclusive.

Obligatory you sound fat, etc...

But seriously - well first, Drew didn't make the list so I'd suggest that this would be better aimed at the author of the site. And secondly, I'd actually suggest there is more of an argument of reverse discrimination between physical attractiveness and scientific fields. I had to read the cheerleader pictured twice when I saw "rocket scientist" listed, not because I didn't think a lady could be rocket scientist, but I was surprised that someone who looked as hot as she does would be a rocket scientist.

And on top of that, there exists a stereotype wherein people think that hot girls have it easier than guys and less attactive girls because of their looks, and thereby are less qualified. "I can't get anyone to take me seriously because they think I've got where I am because of my boobs and not my brains".


i598.photobucket.com
 
2010-07-18 10:46:35 PM  

OldScotch: missmarsha: Drew, it's your site and you're free to do what you like with it. This is one of my favorite places on the 'nets. But as a feminist, I am disappointed when one group I care strongly about marginalizes the other.

We are all attracted to human forms of some kind and there's nothing wrong with that. For me, the problem with a post like this is that, rather than celebrate human sexuality, it reinforces the cultural notion that women are valueless (regardless of career choice or ideological stance) unless they conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness.

If you enjoy looking at these women, that's fine. But posting this shows a disrespect to your female readership by exhibiting willful blindness to the hardships they face in being taken seriously in academic pursuits. You could have gotten around that by being more inclusive.

Obligatory you sound fat, etc...

But seriously - well first, Drew didn't make the list so I'd suggest that this would be better aimed at the author of the site. And secondly, I'd actually suggest there is more of an argument of reverse discrimination between physical attractiveness and scientific fields. I had to read the cheerleader pictured twice when I saw "rocket scientist" listed, not because I didn't think a lady could be rocket scientist, but I was surprised that someone who looked as hot as she does would be a rocket scientist.

And on top of that, there exists a stereotype wherein people think that hot girls have it easier than guys and less attactive girls because of their looks, and thereby are less qualified. "I can't get anyone to take me seriously because they think I've got where I am because of my boobs and not my brains".


funny. your feigned misunderstanding of my point,actually places emphasis on my point. its easier to dismiss the comment than take a google moment or 2 to seek out some ethnic diversity for this particular post. why should you..? you arent racist... you have plenty of Black friends and you love Jay-Z and Darius Rucker... ;-0 trust me, I get it. its not Drew's to make everyone happy, comfortable or welcome. its Drew's, he can run it as he wishes. i just thought he may appreciate the feedback.

but thanks for at least replying.

peace.
 
2010-07-18 10:51:17 PM  

missmarsha: Drew, it's your site and you're free to do what you like with it. This is one of my favorite places on the 'nets. But as a feminist, I am disappointed when one group I care strongly about marginalizes the other.

We are all attracted to human forms of some kind and there's nothing wrong with that. For me, the problem with a post like this is that, rather than celebrate human sexuality, it reinforces the cultural notion that women are valueless (regardless of career choice or ideological stance) unless they conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness.

If you enjoy looking at these women, that's fine. But posting this shows a disrespect to your female readership by exhibiting willful blindness to the hardships they face in being taken seriously in academic pursuits. You could have gotten around that by being more inclusive.


6/10 because you got a bite, but lose points because you copied it straight from the comments in the link. Lazy troll is lazy!
 
2010-07-18 10:57:43 PM  
Who's Darius Rucker?

Should I be asking you or Palverer, the person who's comment you copied & pasted, what your point is?
 
2010-07-18 11:10:42 PM  

OldScotch: Who's Darius Rucker?

Should I be asking you or Palverer, the person who's comment you copied & pasted, what your point is?


+1 rocket scientist. was it the 5 people above me talking about the crazies in the comments or the guy who said he sensed a troll attempt was imminent that tipped you off. Here's a clue - before you go on a crazy rant read the whole thread
 
2010-07-18 11:22:22 PM  

missmarsha: OldScotch: Who's Darius Rucker?

Should I be asking you or Palverer, the person who's comment you copied & pasted, what your point is?

+1 rocket scientist. was it the 5 people above me talking about the crazies in the comments or the guy who said he sensed a troll attempt was imminent that tipped you off. Here's a clue - before you go on a crazy rant read the whole thread


That's a crazy rant? You're easy to please.
 
2010-07-18 11:23:50 PM  

OldScotch: missmarsha: OldScotch: Who's Darius Rucker?

Should I be asking you or Palverer, the person who's comment you copied & pasted, what your point is?

+1 rocket scientist. was it the 5 people above me talking about the crazies in the comments or the guy who said he sensed a troll attempt was imminent that tipped you off. Here's a clue - before you go on a crazy rant read the whole thread

That's a crazy rant? You're easy to please.


that's what she said
/ba-dum bum
//i was hoping to get the early morning liters...
 
2010-07-18 11:28:40 PM  

Makh: I am amazed they were able to shorten that list to anything below 9000. I guess they must only know 15.


There are a lot of beautiful women in biology. And no, I won't tell you their names.
 
2010-07-18 11:55:41 PM  

Mentat: Makh: I am amazed they were able to shorten that list to anything below 9000. I guess they must only know 15.

There are a lot of beautiful women in biology. And no, I won't tell you their names.


Yes, Women do tend to go for the softer sciences.
 
2010-07-19 12:04:32 AM  

BackAssward: Mentat: Makh: I am amazed they were able to shorten that list to anything below 9000. I guess they must only know 15.

There are a lot of beautiful women in biology. And no, I won't tell you their names.

Yes, Women do tend to go for the softer sciences.


I make it a hard science.
 
2010-07-19 12:51:34 AM  

missmarsha: Drew, it's your site and you're free to do what you like with it. This is one of my favorite places on the 'nets. But as a feminist, I am disappointed when one group I care strongly about marginalizes the other.

We are all attracted to human forms of some kind and there's nothing wrong with that. For me, the problem with a post like this is that, rather than celebrate human sexuality, it reinforces the cultural notion that women are valueless (regardless of career choice or ideological stance) unless they conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness.

If you enjoy looking at these women, that's fine. But posting this shows a disrespect to your female readership by exhibiting willful blindness to the hardships they face in being taken seriously in academic pursuits. You could have gotten around that by being more inclusive.



tl:dr because you didn't show a picture of your tits in your profile
 
2010-07-19 12:53:07 AM  
blackmadonna2009.files.wordpress.com

/hot like Dr. Fiorella Terenzi.
 
2010-07-19 12:56:25 AM  

missmarsha: Drew, it's your site and you're free to do what you like with it. This is one of my favorite places on the 'nets. But as a feminist, I am disappointed when one group I care strongly about marginalizes the other.

We are all attracted to human forms of some kind and there's nothing wrong with that. For me, the problem with a post like this is that, rather than celebrate human sexuality, it reinforces the cultural notion that women are valueless (regardless of career choice or ideological stance) unless they conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness.

If you enjoy looking at these women, that's fine. But posting this shows a disrespect to your female readership by exhibiting willful blindness to the hardships they face in being taken seriously in academic pursuits. You could have gotten around that by being more inclusive.


You sound unscientific.
 
2010-07-19 01:17:33 AM  

Andromeda: we should post a list of hot male scientists to offend everyone


I'm not really offended by pictures of "hot" people, no matter the gender. If it bugs me, I don't look.

I do get offended when people say they listen to Morrissey on purpose, though.
 
2010-07-19 04:41:58 AM  
Its not offensive, its just stupid. the list compiler just googled 'female scientist' and picked pictures he thought were hot.

Some of them arent scientists and some of them arent hot.. You expect a list like this to contain people the compiler knows about and finds sexy, both physically and personality-wise.

bleh.
 
2010-07-19 05:04:18 AM  
www.loe.org

Demands a recount.
 
2010-07-19 05:09:56 AM  

missmarsha: If you enjoy looking at these women, that's fine. But posting this shows a disrespect to your female readership by exhibiting willful blindness to the hardships they face in being taken seriously in academic pursuits. You could have gotten around that by being more inclusive.


1/10
 
2010-07-19 05:24:48 AM  
Oh Fark, you are just determined to get me fired. I'll be in my cubicle.
 
2010-07-19 06:18:13 AM  
WTF, maor pics! This is Fark still, right?
 
hej
2010-07-19 06:31:36 AM  
Great, now I'm going to spend all day at work with a raging boner. Thanks, subjerk.
 
2010-07-19 07:01:35 AM  
List incomplete without Carolyn Porco.
 
2010-07-19 07:35:16 AM  

missmarsha: We are all attracted to human forms of some kind and there's nothing wrong with that. For me, the problem with a post like this is that, rather than celebrate human sexuality, it reinforces the cultural notion that women are valueless (regardless of career choice or ideological stance) unless they conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness.


THIS. Besides, this list was lazy as hell. Most of these women are slightly above-average in looks and low-level scientists (if they can even be called that). It's insulting that this is the best list he could come up with.

Oh, and Ms. Shankardass? I'd shank dat ass.

Frank Fingerman
 
2010-07-19 07:41:07 AM  

jekxrb: The atheist list is even hotter.


My god, that picture of Monica Belluci is amazing.
 
2010-07-19 07:41:07 AM  
Come to the Dark Side, we have nookie.
 
2010-07-19 08:01:21 AM  
I could compile a list of about the same quality just going through female grad students in my own department at a relatively small university. The list also included at least a few undergrads, thta really opens up the list.

Meh.
 
2010-07-19 08:07:57 AM  

entropic_existence: I could compile a list of about the same quality just going through female grad students in my own department at a relatively small university. The list also included at least a few undergrads, thta really opens up the list.

Meh.


Feel free to do so (with pics). I'll certainly look at it!
 
2010-07-19 08:18:08 AM  
I'm sorry, this list isn't complete without...
www.arachnoid.com
 
2010-07-19 08:22:47 AM  

House of Tards: No Amy Mainzer?

FAIL.


This!

david.heineke.name
/hot!
//like Amy
 
2010-07-19 08:25:03 AM  
Sarah Kavassalis, physicist

Holy crap this one is stacked. Click on her link.
 
2010-07-19 08:31:56 AM  
I think it's time, as we kick off a new work week, I think it's appropriate that we take a moment to reflect upon all the hard work and dedication of the "small heroes" amongst us - the everyday heroes whose incessant and frenetic toil helps make Fark.com what it is:
i18.photobucket.com
 
2010-07-19 08:36:03 AM  
Say what you want about the link but the fallout from it is far more enjoyable
 
2010-07-19 08:53:04 AM  
Chicks in the humanities are hotter. In my experience. Admittedly they're way, way, way crazier and can't pull a living wage, but they are hotter.
Now dance, puppets.
 
2010-07-19 08:56:52 AM  
Italian astrophysicist Dr. Fiorella Terenzi

solar-center.stanford.edu

/Also a musician... found out about her through Thomas Dolby.
 
2010-07-19 08:58:48 AM  

Gsm136: Say what you want about the link but the fallout from it is far more enjoyable


This. When I submitted this, I hadn't even bothered really looking at the list- sexy scientists, a word containing "tit", and voila- green. I half-assed it just as much as the guy making the list.

So, I'm really getting a kick out of these replies.
 
2010-07-19 08:59:47 AM  

missmarsha: funny. your feigned misunderstanding of my point,actually places emphasis on my point. its easier to dismiss the comment than take a google moment or 2 to seek out some ethnic diversity for this particular post. why should you..? you arent racist... you have plenty of Black friends and you love Jay-Z and Darius Rucker... ;-0 trust me, I get it. its not Drew's to make everyone happy, comfortable or welcome. its Drew's, he can run it as he wishes. i just thought he may appreciate the feedback.

but thanks for at least replying.

peace.


You're so full of win.

/and a shout out to all of the biochem love
 
2010-07-19 09:05:32 AM  
I'd let a few of em graduate my cylinder.
 
2010-07-19 09:09:55 AM  

missmarsha: You could have gotten around that by being more inclusive.


Inclusive of whom? Homely scientists? Sexy non-scientists?

Let me let you in on something from the perspective of a masculine, hetero male:

Women that "conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness" are definitely attention-grabbing, but if that's all they have going for them, that attention isn't kept very long and we move on. Women who are more than their looks, such as being a scientist or musician or having something else they pursue with passion, command rapt attention far after "whoa, she's hot!"

Further, the woman of substance and intelligence who doesn't "conform to a rigid notion of physical attractiveness" can still be sexy. Men like young hotties and always will -- we're men, dammit -- we love women who are smart, good-hearted, and shore up our confidence. Those things are far sexier to us. And the neat thing is, all women who exhibit those qualities are physically beautiful; it just takes us a little more time to notice it.

Give me a homely astronomer over a vapid bikini model any day. The latter would be fun for about a week, but soon become boring; the former would be fun for a lifetime.

A sexy brain outweighs a sexy body any day of the week. Want proof? Ask your male coworkers who they think the sexiest actresses are. I guarantee you'll get more good actresses that are attractive (ex: Natalie Portman) than crappy actresses with all the right curves (ex: Megan Fox). That tells you we like female synaptic activity, even if we fall (way) short on recognizing it publicly.

/amy mainzer FTW
//let's not forget about danica mckellar
///ok, she's a math geek, but that's just as sexy
 
2010-07-19 09:15:22 AM  
commonsenseatheism.com

Physicist Sarah Kavassalis, please and thank you.

Turns out she's at my alma mater, too. That means I have a chance, right? Right?
 
2010-07-19 09:15:54 AM  
Son of a biatch, are smart women hot! Woo. Too bad it's hard to find them fully realized, at least in the US. My new job has a girl from Romania who is our circuit board designer. Despite her bad English, she's very attractive to me because of her intelligence. And, you know, general good looks. But the brains is what is interesting.

/Possibly the Romanian, as well, but that's the 'seeking genetic diversity for mating' talking.
 
2010-07-19 09:19:35 AM  

sinanju: Italian astrophysicist Dr. Fiorella Terenzi

[solar-center.stanford.edu image 184x159]

/Also a musician... found out about her through Thomas Dolby.


Is she the one who blinded him?
 
2010-07-19 09:43:18 AM  
What exactly is a "hospital scientist"?
 
2010-07-19 09:47:04 AM  
commonsenseatheism.com

I didn't even know I had a cheer leader rocket scientist fetish until now.
 
2010-07-19 09:48:17 AM  
Why is the list of dumb starlets and dumb pornstars even associated with the list of smart women? I notice absolutely no crossover.
 
2010-07-19 09:57:28 AM  
www.majhost.com

Rebecca Saxe.
BA in Psychology from Oxford.
PhD in Cognitive Science from MIT.

Here's something to consider: intelligence is a gift, a genetic gift. You couldn't take some random person at birth and put them in a super-special environment and make them as smart as Dr. Saxe. I'm not suggesting that we couldn't better people's chances by bettering their environment - oh no, I know that a lot of people don't have the opportunities she had. I'm just saying that even with those opportunities, few people would achieve what she has achieved.

Intelligence is a genetic gift.
Attractiveness is also a genetic gift.

Why is it offensive to point to one gift and say, "wow, good for her!" and not offensive to point to the other gift and say, "wow, good for her"

The place where it does kind of bother me is when people make stupid science puns (as in, the headline).
 
2010-07-19 10:22:02 AM  

simpsonfan: A woman can achieve things in many fields. Sports, the arts, politics, business, science.

But all that matters is if she is hot?


No. That isn't the point. The point is:

Intelligent: Good
Attractive: Good
Intelligent + Attractive: Awesome.
 
2010-07-19 10:24:26 AM  
www.smokersclub.com

No Thomas Dolby yet in this thread? Fark fails today.

All rather sexy ladies. Wouldn't kick any of them out of bed for eating cookies. A bit skinny on most of them though, so I'd probably provide the cookies.

I question #3's inclusion, though. She's certainly attractive, but doesn't make my eyes pop and go WOW! She looks like the girlfriend of the most normal person in your D&D group, who he convinced to sit in on a session and she immediately decided to make a paladin based on Sailor Moon (when she'd totally be a Warlock or Sorcerer, pay attention people!)

Ahem.

Anyway, should probably make a list of attractive male scientists in the name of fairness. I'm not a woman, but from what I understand about women P.Z. Myers probably would make that list. Women love an older, well-dressed, quirky, intelligent gentleman. Any ladies wish to confirm?
 
2010-07-19 10:27:01 AM  

Tofu: Here's something to consider: intelligence is a gift, a genetic gift. You couldn't take some random person at birth and put them in a super-special environment and make them as smart as Dr. Saxe. I'm not suggesting that we couldn't better people's chances by bettering their environment - oh no, I know that a lot of people don't have the opportunities she had. I'm just saying that even with those opportunities, few people would achieve what she has achieved.


That's incorrect. Adopted siblings show no more correlation in intelligence than strangers. But siblings and twins raised in the same family, too. And it's not just nurture, either. There's a growing body of evidence that infectious disease rates has a significant bearing on intelligence.
 
2010-07-19 10:29:25 AM  

bongmiester: not sure if serious


i wonder if i've walked by her office? Her company is a client of mine, and i've been to their offices
 
2010-07-19 10:31:08 AM  

simpsonfan: A woman can achieve things in many fields. Sports, the arts, politics, business, science.

But all that matters is if she is hot?


Out of curiosity, how would you respond to this:
http://jezebel.com/5572097/why-shameless-objectification-can-be-a-good​-thing

discussed in this fark thread:
http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=5446873

It seems to be doing the same thing, but to men, and saying it's okay to do it to men. Do you agree or disagree?
 
2010-07-19 10:32:42 AM  

OldScotch: Who's Darius Rucker?



Frontman for Hooty and the Blowfish, and i think he's doing country music

/too much trivia in brain, i should go on the gameshow circuit
 
2010-07-19 10:35:58 AM  

Baldanders: Chicks in the humanities are hotter. In my experience. Admittedly they're way, way, way crazier and can't pull a living wage, but they are hotter.
Now dance, puppets.


Engineering girls have always knocked me out, they leave the rest behind

/want to set it up to Back in the USSR, but brain is dead
 
2010-07-19 10:47:12 AM  

Babwa Wawa: Adopted siblings show no more correlation in intelligence than strangers. But siblings and twins raised in the same family, too.


Actually, the largest investigation of intelligence in separated twins is the Bouchard study from 1979. It found a significant correlation (on the order of 76%) in scores between twins. There was a 0% correlation among strangers.

Babwa Wawa: There's a growing body of evidence that infectious disease rates has a significant bearing on intelligence.


Yeah, I also saw an interesting study that showed that if your grandparents had survived just one year of famine that had an effect on you. I know that it's very complicated and that we don't fully understand it.

But I stand by the assertion that some part of intelligence is genetically determined. You may have noticed that the smartest dog (or chimpanzee, pick any animal you like) is not as intelligent as the average human. They have different genes than we do and it limits their individual potential.

I guess my point is that if you accept the obvious fact that you are smarter than a dog, and you accept the obvious explanation that the difference between you and the dog is mostly genetic, then it's not too far a stretch to suspect the same thing applies within the species.

I think that most people reject this idea, not on its merits, but out of fear that it'll be used to justify racism. That mostly just shows that they don't know much about evolution. There's so much variation from one generation to another that it doesn't matter a whole lot to an individual if your parents were geniuses or idiots. It matters to the group but not to the individual.
 
2010-07-19 10:49:09 AM  
How is the Frank Fingerman farker not a total farker?

3horn
 
2010-07-19 10:50:02 AM  

missmarsha: Drew, it's your site and you're free to do what you like with it.


You'll get over it.
 
2010-07-19 11:01:54 AM  
No Michelle Boyd?? FAIL!

OK, she's an actress now, but does have a neuroscience degree so she should qualify.

Wiki
Top GIS link
 
2010-07-19 11:04:36 AM  

sinanju: Italian astrophysicist Dr. Fiorella Terenzi

/Also a musician... found out about her through Thomas Dolby.


Celine Dion is a scientist?
 
2010-07-19 11:05:29 AM  
These are my kind of women. Smartness = sexy.
 
2010-07-19 11:09:54 AM  

BigSnatch: "I'm totally a Nuclear Scientist. I research atoms and like other stuff."


I was totally watching that movie at 3:00AM this morning when I couldn't sleep. I forgot how bad her acting was.

/barely slept in three days
//farking manic-depression
 
2010-07-19 11:12:46 AM  
 
2010-07-19 11:18:06 AM  

Raw_fishFood: I didn't even know I had a cheer leader rocket scientist fetish until now.


They're experts in generating lift.
 
2010-07-19 11:20:08 AM  

Nebulious: Raw_fishFood: I didn't even know I had a cheer leader rocket scientist fetish until now.

They're experts in generating lift.


*golf clap*
 
2010-07-19 11:30:31 AM  

Mentat: bongmiester: not sure if serious

That one is true.


A project manager for an aerospace company == rocket scientist?

Uhhh, no.
 
2010-07-19 11:33:28 AM  
I liked it, and I liked the link to sexy atheists even more.

You know that image that has Republican - Democrat women (where all the Republican ones happen to have an average age under 45, the Democrat ones an average age over 60?).

blogs4conservatives.files.wordpress.com

I feel an image like that is in order. Creationist or religious women on one side...

...and that was her BEFORE the cancer that her savior gave her as a reward...

...and scientific or atheist women on the other.

By the way: GIS 'Republican women'. If it's not the 'Republican - Democrat women' image from above, this is the kind of thing you get.

www.isledegrande.com
 
2010-07-19 11:37:52 AM  
Dammit, that'll teach me not to post without checking the img src.

Atheist...

snarkerati.com

Religious...

www.journeywithjesus.net

Religious with divine intervention / retribution?

totallylookslike.files.wordpress.com
 
2010-07-19 11:46:18 AM  

Lernaeus: Want proof? Ask your male coworkers who they think the sexiest actresses are. I guarantee you'll get more good actresses that are attractive (ex: Natalie Portman) than crappy actresses with all the right curves (ex: Megan Fox).


well aren't you just adorable.
 
2010-07-19 11:50:14 AM  
jeez, this list is kinda creepy, it's like he just trolled the internets for profile pictures of science chicks and posted them in a list. not exactly the same as actresses and porn star atheists.
 
2010-07-19 11:51:21 AM  
Wondering if we should start a male version, being that I am a scientist and male and NOT a geeky, oily, nerd.
 
2010-07-19 11:53:33 AM  
Math is like science and other smart stuff

www.dailystab.com

skepticdad.files.wordpress.com
 
2010-07-19 11:54:13 AM  

threedingers: Physicist Sarah Kavassalis, please and thank you.

Turns out she's at my alma mater, too. That means I have a chance, right? Right?


No CV, no first author publications, no record of degrees granted... paper tiger. Still probably smarter than most people, and sexy as hell -- exceptional breasts and lovely angular face.
 
2010-07-19 12:00:54 PM  
/Married a brainiac geophysicist, kick etc.
 
2010-07-19 12:13:09 PM  
Came for Danica McKeller. Leaving satisfied.
 
2010-07-19 12:13:19 PM  

glass_ibis:
A project manager for an aerospace company == rocket scientist?

Uhhh, no.


They're not mutually exclusive.
You can be a manager and not an engineer.
But you can also be an engineer and a manager.

Williams is a 25-year old aerospace engineer for the Jacobs Engineering Group, which is NASA's main scientific support contractor.

Her senior year, she wrote gobs of essays, underwent a two-day observation at problem-solving and group work, and won a $10,000 scholarship from Cessna.


She did the hours for an engineering degree, I'll counter has an aerospace engineer or more colloquially, rocket scientist.

i.a.cnn.netimg2.timeinc.net
/Or is it just me.
 
2010-07-19 12:16:28 PM  

Tofu: There was a 0% correlation among strangers.


Smells like a flawed study. Probability would predict a 50% correlation for binary comparisons among strangers. Anything that would reduce correlation among strangers to 0% would be of such tight-ass tolerance that twin correlation would be equally 0%.

Speaking of flawed studies, there's a reason why sexy scientists are hard to find: Because they use their brains for their careers. That's neither a contradiction nor an outrage.

If you're looking for supermodels, every serious applicant is going to look good, because that's where the money's at. Brains are of secondary importance, so it's not particularly likely a supermodel is smart (else it increases the odds they'll do something else for a living), though nothing's stopping them. But if you're going to pursue a career in modeling, whether you're a genius or a retard, you'd better look smoking hot.

Apply that backwards. I've met scientists who were drop-dead gorgeous. You aren't aware of them because they're not famous, for two reasons: One, they looked good because they were still young and just starting out, and two, you only get famous in academia if you're published -- which usually takes time. Looks aren't even of secondary importance; it's of no importance, so it's not particularly likely a famous scientist will be physically attractive.

It's absurd to be surprised a female scientist may not be physically attractive, but that doesn't mean scientists are generally less attractive than any other career that doesn't depend entirely on looks for success. It just means looks flat-out don't matter -- it's a meritocracy -- so looks don't prevent ugly scientists from becoming famous. In both cases, knockout geniuses will always be a tiny minority.
 
2010-07-19 12:24:30 PM  

darkscout: She did the hours for an engineering degree, I'll counter has an aerospace engineer or more colloquially, rocket scientist.

i.a.cnn.netimg2.timeinc.net
/Or is it just me.


nope...I thought the same thing.

Tenk: My god, that picture of Monica Belluci is amazing.


That pic made it almost impossible to leave the house today. Yowza...
 
2010-07-19 12:42:36 PM  
Holy crap, how did they put that list together? I work with one of them. I wonder if she knows she's on that list.
 
2010-07-19 12:46:46 PM  

s2s2s2: Why is the list of dumb starlets and dumb pornstars even associated with the list of smart women? I notice absolutely no crossover.


I believe that Natalie Portman is quite smart.
 
2010-07-19 12:49:24 PM  

LasersHurt: Son of a biatch, are smart women hot! Woo. Too bad it's hard to find them fully realized, at least in the US. My new job has a girl from Romania who is our circuit board designer. Despite her bad English, she's very attractive to me because of her intelligence. And, you know, general good looks. But the brains is what is interesting.

/Possibly the Romanian, as well, but that's the 'seeking genetic diversity for mating' talking.


I too find women's brains to be their most interesting feature. That's why I throw away the rest of them. I have a sexy, sexy collection of women's brains in jars, here in my office.
 
2010-07-19 12:50:39 PM  
List fails without Alice Roberts:

(Images too large for inline - link to Gallery)

Not to mention the fact that it was great to see a TV presenter who could actually see through pseudo-scientific nonsense when it was being spouted by some people she interviewed for the "Incredible Human Journey".
 
2010-07-19 12:55:06 PM  
Heh. As for the inverse relationship between intelligence and hotness, I say this:

Regardless of whether you believe in God, know that he does not give with both hands.

Thinking you can have it all is just your pride farking with you.
 
2010-07-19 12:56:25 PM  
Commonsenseathiest? Isn't that an oxymoron? Are you ABSOLUTELY sure?
 
2010-07-19 01:03:17 PM  

House of Tards: No Amy Mainzer?

FAIL.


This.
 
2010-07-19 01:03:34 PM  

Tofu: Babwa Wawa: Adopted siblings show no more correlation in intelligence than strangers. But siblings and twins raised in the same family, too.

Actually, the largest investigation of intelligence in separated twins is the Bouchard study from 1979. It found a significant correlation (on the order of 76%) in scores between twins. There was a 0% correlation among strangers.

Babwa Wawa: There's a growing body of evidence that infectious disease rates has a significant bearing on intelligence.

Yeah, I also saw an interesting study that showed that if your grandparents had survived just one year of famine that had an effect on you. I know that it's very complicated and that we don't fully understand it.

But I stand by the assertion that some part of intelligence is genetically determined. You may have noticed that the smartest dog (or chimpanzee, pick any animal you like) is not as intelligent as the average human. They have different genes than we do and it limits their individual potential.

I guess my point is that if you accept the obvious fact that you are smarter than a dog, and you accept the obvious explanation that the difference between you and the dog is mostly genetic, then it's not too far a stretch to suspect the same thing applies within the species.

I think that most people reject this idea, not on its merits, but out of fear that it'll be used to justify racism. That mostly just shows that they don't know much about evolution. There's so much variation from one generation to another that it doesn't matter a whole lot to an individual if your parents were geniuses or idiots. It matters to the group but not to the individual.


Of course there's a genetic factor in intelligence. I wouldn't claim otherwise.

You're still wrong (pops).

Genetics are an influence, and it might even be argued that strong influence, but regardless, it's a secondary one.

Also genetic factors can often be mistaken for environmental factors. Such as infectious disease (pops); parasitic infections in particular have measurable and massive impact on population intelligence.
www.economist.com
 
2010-07-19 01:12:03 PM  

bongmiester: not sure if serious


Rocket scientist usually means "engineer". We're a bit more jock than nerd, while we rarely have the time to actually play sports at the highest levels seeing us in intramurals or on the sidelines doing various things isn't unusual, and we have our own sporty events (like concrete canoe).

glass_ibis: Mentat: bongmiester: not sure if serious

That one is true.

A project manager for an aerospace company == rocket scientist?

Uhhh, no.


You... know what a project manager does, right?

No, I see that you do not.

//Hint: generally requires a relevant technical degree for a reason. Checking figures and calculations, knowing how to evenly delegate the work involved in product design, etc. Plus, generally selected by appointing someone in the project group to the position, unless that company has a really, really nonstandard organization.

//Also involves talking to the company management for the other project engineers, and the company management sometimes includes people without technical expertise, like the advertising guys, the PHBs, etc. So many floor guys avoid the position like the plague.
 
2010-07-19 01:19:00 PM  

Some Bass Playing Guy: Wow. Read all of the comments. The level of butthurt that someone would DARE post a list of sexy FEMALE scientists is amazing.


Well it is pretty sexist to assume that only female scientists can be "sexy".

/this is the modern world; you've got to cater to your entire audience
 
2010-07-19 01:25:57 PM  

Jim_Callahan: //Also involves talking to the company management for the other project engineers, and the company management sometimes includes people without technical expertise, like the advertising guys, the PHBs, etc. So many floor guys avoid the position like the plague.


So what you do is you take the specifications from the customers and you bring them down to the software engineers?

www.luminomagazine.com

I disagree about project managers, although the definition can mean different things in different companies. In most companies lately, the PM role is increasingly non-technical, and specializes in itself (project management certifications - that seems a fairly masturbatory field of study).

In my current workplace, PMs are treated as more or less secretaries. They get everybody's calendar together to work on a project/take a meeting. They take notes at the meeting, and provide everyone with action items.

In fact, my boss just assigned a project manager to me and this is exactly what he does - makes sure I get the resources I need to get projects I'm assigned completed. He does all the cat-herding, in other words. He has no technical background that I can determine, but I really don't know.

Now Program Manager is a different animal entirely, and much more like what you're describing.
 
2010-07-19 01:29:43 PM  

Whiteston: Commonsenseathiest? Isn't that an oxymoron? Are you ABSOLUTELY sure?


More of a redundancy.
 
2010-07-19 01:33:56 PM  

darkscout: glass_ibis:
A project manager for an aerospace company == rocket scientist?

Uhhh, no.

They're not mutually exclusive.
You can be a manager and not an engineer.
But you can also be an engineer and a manager.

Williams is a 25-year old aerospace engineer for the Jacobs Engineering Group, which is NASA's main scientific support contractor.

Her senior year, she wrote gobs of essays, underwent a two-day observation at problem-solving and group work, and won a $10,000 scholarship from Cessna.

She did the hours for an engineering degree, I'll counter has an aerospace engineer or more colloquially, rocket scientist.


/Or is it just me.


I'd perform a point load analysis on her, that's for sure
 
2010-07-19 01:35:59 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: Some Bass Playing Guy: Wow. Read all of the comments. The level of butthurt that someone would DARE post a list of sexy FEMALE scientists is amazing.

Well it is pretty sexist to assume that only female scientists can be "sexy".

/this is the modern world; you've got to cater to your entire audience


FTA: "Why no men? Because I unavoidably find women more sexy, of course!"

In other words, he is unable to find an appropriate definition for "sexy men scientist", because he does not know how to measure sexiness in men.

I imagine that if the female members of this forum were to make some suggestions, or compile such a list themselves, there would be no objection from the male contingent.

Considering the number of women friends I have who go ga-ga over firefighters, it does go both ways.
 
2010-07-19 01:40:44 PM  

Firefly4F4: In other words, he is unable to find an appropriate definition for "sexy men scientist", because he does not know how to measure sexiness in men.I imagine that if the female members of this forum were to make some suggestions, or compile such a list themselves, there would be no objection from the male contingent.Considering the number of women friends I have who go ga-ga over firefighters, it does go both ways.


I do know an ex firefighter(and still looks it) who also works as a designer when he can

sorry ladies, the man is already married. there've been suggestions to hire him at my day job, if we do, i'll install a discrete webcam if donations reach a certain point.
 
2010-07-19 02:15:02 PM  

Sgian Dubh: Whiteston: Commonsenseathiest? Isn't that an oxymoron? Are you ABSOLUTELY sure?

More of a redundancy.


No it's not. "Atheist" means you don't believe in god. It makes no judgment as to WHY you don't believe in god. Maybe you disbelieve out of common sense, maybe you disbelieve because your dog told you to.

Please quit trying to assign attributes to atheism that are not contained therein. Thanks.
 
2010-07-19 02:17:36 PM  

Babwa Wawa: You're still wrong


I'm not sure that I'm going to be able to discuss this with you. You quote my entire post, then say I'm wrong and give me a link to the wiki page on twin studies, which says that genetics has an "intermediate" level influence on IQ. For one thing, that's something of a weasel word. For another, it's not really clear which part of my post you think that link refutes, because if you think it refutes my thesis, it certainly does not.

What would have been really helpful is if you quoted just the part of my post that you wanted to direct that link to. For example, you might have done this:

Tofu: the Bouchard study from 1979. It found a significant correlation (on the order of 76%) in scores between twins.


I disagree and cite this page (here's where your link to wiki goes) which says that other studies go as low as 40%.

If that's actually what you meant to do just let me know and I'll respond to it. Otherwise, I'm not sure what we're talking about.

Babwa Wawa: Also genetic factors can often be mistaken for environmental factors. Such as infectious disease (pops);


I agree with this. In fact, I just recently saw a very interesting article that showed a correlation between parasite infection and soccer ability - lol.

But I don't think any of this disproves my thesis which is: very high intelligence is as much a genetic gift as very high sexual attractiveness.
 
2010-07-19 02:19:29 PM  

MonkeyAngst: maybe you disbelieve because your dog told you to.


What such a dog might look like:

www.majhost.com
 
2010-07-19 02:27:46 PM  
I would comment on the cheerleader rocket scientist except she looks too much like my cousin so meh
 
2010-07-19 02:33:41 PM  

Tofu: MonkeyAngst: maybe you disbelieve because your dog told you to.

What such a dog might look like:


Yes, excellent example. If Brian came to atheism out of common sense, then he falls into the category of common-sense atheist. If Peter came to atheism because Brian told him to, he's just following a leader and not applying any common sense after all.

Now, if Brian himself came to atheism because religious people piss him off, then he's not a common-sense atheist either, he's just a contrarian dick.
 
2010-07-19 02:45:09 PM  
commonsenseatheism.com

I'd like to fondle her brains.
 
2010-07-19 03:07:35 PM  
My sexy, evil chemist, scientist.

img843.imageshack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
2010-07-19 03:16:36 PM  

staphkiller: My sexy, evil chemist, scientist.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us


loyalkng.com
 
2010-07-19 03:27:33 PM  
No Marie Curie on this list? She was so hot she set Geiger counters off!
 
2010-07-19 03:45:29 PM  

MonkeyAngst: Tofu: MonkeyAngst: maybe you disbelieve because your dog told you to.

What such a dog might look like:

Yes, excellent example. If Brian came to atheism out of common sense, then he falls into the category of common-sense atheist. If Peter came to atheism because Brian told him to, he's just following a leader and not applying any common sense after all.

Now, if Brian himself came to atheism because religious people piss him off, then he's not a common-sense atheist either, he's just a contrarian dick.


damnit people focus on what's important

intelligent smart women, ya know, geek girls
 
2010-07-19 04:12:53 PM  
What a pathetic, creepy, douchebag. It looks like 75 percent of those pictures were taken from people he knows at work or some creepy bullshiat like that. Fail article is fail.
 
2010-07-19 04:15:02 PM  

threedingers: Physicist Sarah Kavassalis, please and thank you.

Turns out she's at my alma mater, too. That means I have a chance, right? Right?



Yes, PLEASE!! Wow. I bet she is a freak in the sack.
 
2010-07-19 04:24:36 PM  

Epiphany: What a pathetic, creepy, douchebag. It looks like 75 percent of those pictures were taken from people he knows at work or some creepy bullshiat like that. Fail article is fail.


Looks to me like he got them from a google search. Many are taken from bios on university websites. It is kinda creepy.
 
2010-07-19 04:34:58 PM  

lennavan: Epiphany: What a pathetic, creepy, douchebag. It looks like 75 percent of those pictures were taken from people he knows at work or some creepy bullshiat like that. Fail article is fail.

Looks to me like he got them from a google search. Many are taken from bios on university websites. It is kinda creepy.


The man needs to stop ripping off my techniques and develop some of his own.
 
2010-07-19 06:17:12 PM  
yes but does she do the beast with two backs. because you can only take so much of a woman talking
 
2010-07-19 06:29:23 PM  

missmarsha: How is the Frank Fingerman farker not a total farker?

3horn


Oh, I'm a total farker alright. And now since someone sponsored me, I have a month of TotalFark, too! Thanks if it was you.

Frank Fingerman
 
2010-07-19 07:06:26 PM  

You'd help them titrate


"8.5..."

"7.0..."

"9.0..."


*whisper whisper whisper*


"Oh, TI-TRATE. That makes more sense, though the other way is not without its charms."
 
2010-07-19 09:34:28 PM  
I have always wanted this Pole to fondle my pole. (new window)

img235.imageshack.us
 
2010-07-19 11:00:55 PM  

Babwa Wawa: Tofu: Babwa Wawa: Adopted siblings show no more correlation in intelligence than strangers. But siblings and twins raised in the same family, too.

Actually, the largest investigation of intelligence in separated twins is the Bouchard study from 1979. It found a significant correlation (on the order of 76%) in scores between twins. There was a 0% correlation among strangers.

Babwa Wawa: There's a growing body of evidence that infectious disease rates has a significant bearing on intelligence.

Yeah, I also saw an interesting study that showed that if your grandparents had survived just one year of famine that had an effect on you. I know that it's very complicated and that we don't fully understand it.

But I stand by the assertion that some part of intelligence is genetically determined. You may have noticed that the smartest dog (or chimpanzee, pick any animal you like) is not as intelligent as the average human. They have different genes than we do and it limits their individual potential.

I guess my point is that if you accept the obvious fact that you are smarter than a dog, and you accept the obvious explanation that the difference between you and the dog is mostly genetic, then it's not too far a stretch to suspect the same thing applies within the species.

I think that most people reject this idea, not on its merits, but out of fear that it'll be used to justify racism. That mostly just shows that they don't know much about evolution. There's so much variation from one generation to another that it doesn't matter a whole lot to an individual if your parents were geniuses or idiots. It matters to the group but not to the individual.

Of course there's a genetic factor in intelligence. I wouldn't claim otherwise.

You're still wrong (pops).

Genetics are an influence, and it might even be argued that strong influence, but regardless, it's a secondary one.

Also genetic factors can often be mistaken for environmental factors. Such as infectious disease (pops); parasitic infections in particular have measurable and massive impact on population intelligence.


Maybe dumb people are more likely to catch infectious diseases?

/My nobel prize please, and don't forget the check...
 
2010-07-20 12:35:02 AM  
List needs moar geologists!

/field geos, amirite?
//those who know, know.
 
2010-07-20 02:27:01 PM  

loonatic112358: OldScotch: Who's Darius Rucker?

Frontman for Hooty and the Blowfish, and i think he's doing country music

/too much trivia in brain, i should go on the gameshow circuit


Better answer
 
Displayed 131 of 131 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report