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.

(The New York Times)   New York Times insists modern chemistry sets are superior to the ones of days gone by, because they teach children modern-day skills like writing turd-polishing articles about nancified chemistry sets for the New York Times   (nytimes.com) divider line 4
    More: Obvious, chemistry, polishing, beakers, test tubes, history of science, writings  
•       •       •

2290 clicks; posted to Geek » on 25 Dec 2012 at 12:27 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-25 12:05:26 AM
2 votes:
If it's not capable of producing explosions or toxic gases it ain't sh*t
2012-12-25 02:49:47 PM
1 votes:
Lawyers and sissy-marys, the lot of you. Oooh, I'll try to find some loophole technicality. Oooh, I'll use daddy's machine to do the work for me. Don't you get it? Chemistry sets are for learning about what's inside you, not what's inside the vial.

This is why grandpa semiotix stopped putting water in any of the vials.
2012-12-25 12:34:24 AM
1 votes:
I'm sure that in 1985, plutonium is available in every corner drugstore, but in 1955, it's a little hard to come by.

www.instablogsimages.com
2012-12-25 12:05:26 AM
1 votes:
Back in the day, they had kits where you could build your own geiger counter...complete with radioactive sample and stuff.  Now it's all whimpy stuff.
 
Displayed 4 of 4 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report