On a somewhat lighter note: Today is Gregor Mendel's 189th Birthday...

[CaliforniaPeggy]

Google has done wonders again!

[WillParkinson]

1. Happy Birthday Mr. Mendel! Thanks to you....

I gave Peas a chance.

:)

[Trajan]

2. Dont forget ....

Eat your peas ......

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. But I'm not very fond of peas!

[denbot]

4. One of my favorite monks..

Bio 111 was a fun class.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

5. That's right....he was a monk.

Thank you for reminding me.

His work on genetics was nothing short of astonishing.

I loved studying it.

[Kceres]

6. Hey, we had peas tonight for dinner!

Now I can say they were in his honor.

[Lucian]

7. Meh.

He fudged his results according to my biological anthropology professor.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

8. Oh did he?

Do you have any links?

His work was still pivotal, and very important...

IMHO of course.

[Lucian]

9. I don't have any links.

It was according to my biological anthropology professor during a lecture on genetics in the fall of 2009.

Found this:

Mendel's experimental results have later been the object of considerable dispute. Fisher analyzed the results of the F2 (second filial) ratio and found them to be implausibly close to the exact ratio of 3 to 1. Only a few would accuse Mendel of scientific malpractice or call it a scientific fraud—reproduction of his experiments has demonstrated the validity of his hypothesis—however, the results have continued to be a mystery for many, though it is often cited as an example of confirmation bias. This might arise if he detected an approximate 3 to 1 ratio early in his experiments with a small sample size, and continued collecting more data until the results conformed more nearly to an exact ratio. It is sometimes suggested that he may have censored his results, and that his seven traits each occur on a separate chromosome pair, an extremely unlikely occurrence if they were chosen at random. In fact, the genes Mendel studied occurred in only four linkage groups, and only one gene pair (out of 21 possible) is close enough to show deviation from independent assortment; this is not a pair that Mendel studied. Some recent researchers have suggested that Fisher's criticisms of Mendel's work may have been exaggerated.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

10. Thanks for the info. It 's interesting, to say the least.

[Lionel Mandrake]

13. Let's be fair.

There are plenty of comments on the web to the effect that Mendel's results are "too good to be true" in a statistical sense. Beyond this, it is all speculation.

Similar charges have been made about other famous scientists of the past, including Newton. It was not until the 20th century that scientists began to be careful about possible sources of statistical bias. It would be anachronistic to accuse earlier scientists of not living up to present-day standards.

[jtuck004]

11. The Wiki article says his papers were burned by the executors rather than pay taxes.

Teabaggers, even back then, would rather destroy everything than build on what you have.

[Trajan]

12. I dont know why more people don't like peas ....

They are kinda sweet for a veggie ..... A bit like a slime filled bubble, yes .... but still sweet and fresh tasting ..... They should be more popular ...

Maybe they are, and people are just too embarrassed to say ...

[MineralMan]

14. Peas, peas, and more peas.

Always with the peas. :rofl:

[CaliforniaPeggy]

15. Hey, don't blame me!

Mendel started with the peas!

I didn't!

Maybe you would have been happier if he'd worked with, say Brussels sprouts?

:P