Girls cry says Nobel Prize winning British scientist

[Hal 9000]

Mail online:

The revered scientist told the BBC: 'I have fallen in love with people in the lab and people in the lab have fallen in love with me and it's very disruptive to the science because it's terribly important that in a lab people are on a level playing field.

'It's terribly important that you can criticise people's ideas without criticising them and if they burst into tears, it means that you tend to hold back from getting at the absolute truth.

'Science is about nothing but getting at the truth and anything that gets in the way of that diminishes, in my experience, the science.'

He added: 'What was intended as a light-hearted, ironic comment apparently was interpreted deadly seriously by my audience.

'I'm really, really sorry I caused any offence, that's awful. I just meant to be honest, actually.'

Sir Tim, a Cambridge graduate, became a fellow of the Royal Society in 1991. Ten years later he was awarded the Nobel prize for physiology or medicine alongside Lee Hartwell and Paul Nurse for their discoveries of 'key regulators of the cell cycle'.

You people can hate him all you want - drive him out of a job, but there is certain validity or at reasons why he has come to his opinions.

[kimmy]

Should I compare myself to the blacks in southern USA back in the sixties every time I pass a women only gym? No, it's shameful and ignorant to even suggest that.

Terribly sorry to have offended your sensibilities. I had no idea that the plight of the American black people of the pre-Civil Rights Act deep south was such a personal issue for you, but now that you've informed me I will strive to be more considerate in the future.

I do find it fascinating when the conservatives bust out the PC card, though. They'll talk about "the war on drugs", "the war on crime", "the war on religion", "the war on Christmas", "the war on families", "the war on sugar", "the war on salt", "the war on obesity", "the war on cars", "the war on graffiti"... but if a political adversary talks about "the war on women", suddenly they're offended because using "war" in this way is "disrespectful to the troops."

Mail online:

The revered scientist told the BBC: 'I have fallen in love with people in the lab and people in the lab have fallen in love with me and it's very disruptive to the science because it's terribly important that in a lab people are on a level playing field.

'It's terribly important that you can criticise people's ideas without criticising them and if they burst into tears, it means that you tend to hold back from getting at the absolute truth.

'Science is about nothing but getting at the truth and anything that gets in the way of that diminishes, in my experience, the science.'

He added: 'What was intended as a light-hearted, ironic comment apparently was interpreted deadly seriously by my audience.

'I'm really, really sorry I caused any offence, that's awful. I just meant to be honest, actually.'

Sir Tim, a Cambridge graduate, became a fellow of the Royal Society in 1991. Ten years later he was awarded the Nobel prize for physiology or medicine alongside Lee Hartwell and Paul Nurse for their discoveries of 'key regulators of the cell cycle'.

You people can hate him all you want - drive him out of a job, but there is certain validity or at reasons why he has come to his opinions.

He had already offered his resignation before any of us had even heard of this news item. Don't blame us. He himself concedes that the blame is his own.

Anyway, millions upon millions of men and women work alongside each other every day in all kinds of environments. If some people have a problem doing so, perhaps the problem is their own and not a problem inherent in mixed-gender workplaces.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

Seems to be a problem for women only gyms...but that's the subject of another thread.

[Hal 9000]

Terribly sorry to have offended your sensibilities. I had no idea that the plight of the American black people of the pre-Civil Rights Act deep south was such a personal issue for you, but now that you've informed me I will strive to be more considerate in the future.

I do find it fascinating when the conservatives bust out the PC card, though. They'll talk about "the war on drugs", "the war on crime", "the war on religion", "the war on Christmas", "the war on families", "the war on sugar", "the war on salt", "the war on obesity", "the war on cars", "the war on graffiti"... but if a political adversary talks about "the war on women", suddenly they're offended because using "war" in this way is "disrespectful to the troops."

He had already offered his resignation before any of us had even heard of this news item. Don't blame us. He himself concedes that the blame is his own.

Anyway, millions upon millions of men and women work alongside each other every day in all kinds of environments. If some people have a problem doing so, perhaps the problem is their own and not a problem inherent in mixed-gender workplaces.

-k

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Who knows. And...for the record, I'm not even saying he's right or wrong - simply that his point comes from a certain amount of experience and he should be heard. But that's just me, I listen to what people say whether i agree or not because there is value and learning experiences to be had.

What this board is missing is the ability to listen and ask why someone believes what they believe. Everything we talk about requires a "cite", we can't speak as people normally do.

[Hal 9000]

Seems to be a problem for women only gyms...but that's the subject of another thread.

I dont mint trolls who want to add to a topic - even when it's an agitation. Agitating brings out deeper thought, brings people out of their comfort area and forces them to explore a deeper side of themselves.

Drive by trolls are quite annoying and frankly...desperate.

[bush_cheney2004]

I dont mint trolls who want to add to a topic - even when it's an agitation. Agitating brings out deeper thought, brings people out of their comfort area and forces them to explore a deeper side of themselves.

Drive by trolls are quite annoying and frankly...desperate.

I'll leave that to the troll experts....they are very desperate as well.

If an old fool's opinion about gender segregation in the workplace be the topic, his punishment should be trying to get a Curves membership...as an employee.

Edited June 13, 2015 by bush_cheney2004

[Hal 9000]

This dude that all you women are hating on has been a major player in the fight against breast cancer. But, who cares, he's just an old mysogonistic bastard...right?

In the early 1980s, Tim Hunt discovered the first cyclin molecule. He made use of another organism in his experiments, Arbacia, a sea urchin. In his experiments, he found strange bands with a basic behavior of strange disappearance which turned out to occur about 10 minutes before each cellular division. He called these bands cyclins because the levels of these proteins vary periodically during the cell cycle. Cyclins are proteins that are formed and then degraded during each cell cycle. This explains their varying levels.

The cyclins bind to the CDK molecules, thereby regulating the CDK activity and selecting the proteins to be phosphorylated. Cyclins have no catalytic activity and CDKs are inactive in the absence of its partner cyclin. When a CDK is activated by its partner cyclin, it activates or deactivates proteins that in turn control the entry of cells into the next phase of the cell cycle

This discovery has great impact in cancer research. Chromosome alterations can be caused by faulty cell cycle control, defective S phase or uncontrolled cyclin-CDK activation. These chromosomal abnormalities are directly related to the development of cancer cells. Developments in the field of cancer diagnosis via this discovery include the fact that detecting increased levels of CDK-molecules and cyclins are sometimes found in human tumors like breast cancer and brain tumor. In the field of cancer therapy, inhibitors of CDK-molecules are now being tested for its effects in cancer treatment.

[kimmy]

Nobody is saying that his comments invalidate all of his achievements.

The guy who invented the transistor-- one of the most significant inventions since the wheel-- later went on to delve into eugenics and race-based theories of intelligence. Isaac Newton was, when not revolutionizing mathematics and physics, studying alchemy and the occult. Compared to those guys, Sir Tim's antiquated ideas about gender segregation seem positively cosmopolitan. But likewise, just because he achieved great success in the field of biochemistry, that doesn't mean that his expertise in other fields is equally profound.

Given his stated feelings about working with women, he's no longer suitable to be in a position where he'll have authority to hire and fire and select candidates. That much should be obvious.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

The guy who invented the transistor-- one of the most significant inventions since the wheel-- later went on to delve into eugenics and race-based theories of intelligence.

So did Tommy Douglas...the "Greatest Canadian".

[cybercoma]

.

Edited June 13, 2015 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Who knows. And...for the record, I'm not even saying he's right or wrong

You're awfully apologetic for someone who's not saying he's right. And it's also pretty telling that you take his word as gospel, but completely ignore others who've spoken out against what he's saying including myriad women scientists around the world. But hey, cool. This guy speaks from experience. Women's sexuality is distrating to straight men in the lab. Female scientists should be segregated or wear burqas because this guy has experience. Edited June 13, 2015 by cybercoma

[GostHacked]

Is that what you were doing? It looked more like you were throwing non-sequiturs at the wall to see whether you could derail the thread.

-k

But it's not trolling !!!!!

[Hal 9000]

You're awfully apologetic for someone who's not saying he's right. And it's also pretty telling that you take his word as gospel, but completely ignore others who've spoken out against what he's saying including myriad women scientists around the world. But hey, cool. This guy speaks from experience. Women's sexuality is distrating to straight men in the lab. Female scientists should be segregated or wear burqas because this guy has experience.

Listening to people who you disagree with can be a valuable learning experience too. Do you ever wonder why Charles Manson, David Duke or Caitlyn Jenner think the way they do? Do you ever wonder why blacks are at odds with police, why blacks are killing blacks at an alarming rate? I do, and would love to listen to their world views - does it mean that I'd agree with them? No, but I'm sure i'd learn something new.

The second you heard that something negative was said about a females, you shut down, don't care to know context and simply wish the offender into a cornfield. That's the way many of your ilk operate - not me.

BTW - It's also noteworthy that geniuses like this dude aren't the most socially savvy people in the world.

[cybercoma]

Listening to people who you disagree with can be a valuable learning experience too

Yes. It would be really valuable for black people to just sit down and spend some time listening to what the KKK have to say.

[cybercoma]

Since that's similar to what your argument is, I should probably make it explicit: I'm being sarcastic.

[WestCoastRunner]

This case is just one of many examples that sexism is alive and thriving even in the scientific community. It's really a no brainer.

[Hal 9000]

Of course sexism is alive.

Now, considering that you believe in equality, why don't you find 3 cases of sexism towards men that have gone international and resulted in women losing their jobs and then we can really have a discussion.

[WestCoastRunner]

Of course sexism is alive.

Now, considering that you believe in equality, why don't you find 3 cases of sexism towards men that have gone international and resulted in women losing their jobs and then we can really have a discussion.

Honestly, I don't know how to respond to this.

Edited June 13, 2015 by WestCoastRunner

[Michael Hardner]

Honestly, I don't know how to respond to this.

How about "What's the relevance ?". If we find no examples of discipline against women for sexism does that mean it doesn't exist ? That it does, but at far less of a degree of magnitude or seriousness to warrant the world's attention ? Do we use media coverage as some kind of barometer of morality within certain groups ? Should we ? Does it mean there's a world feminist conspiracy ?

Or is this just a passing observation that doesn't add up to much of anything ?

[cybercoma]

Or how about people start understanding how sexism and racism have to do with institutionalized and systemic power and not individual prejudices..

[WestCoastRunner]

How about "What's the relevance ?". If we find no examples of discipline against women for sexism does that mean it doesn't exist ? That it does, but at far less of a degree of magnitude or seriousness to warrant the world's attention ? Do we use media coverage as some kind of barometer of morality within certain groups ? Should we ? Does it mean there's a world feminist conspiracy ?

Or is this just a passing observation that doesn't add up to much of anything ?

I would put the onus on Hal to find these '3' cases of sexism against men. He's the one that brought it up and when he does present these cases, then perhaps we can discuss it.

[Michael Hardner]

Or maybe we just don't have 3 cases. In any case, I will leave my questions out there.

[WestCoastRunner]

Or maybe we just don't have 3 cases. In any case, I will leave my questions out there.

These questions are silly until Hal provides credence to them.

[Michael Hardner]

These questions are silly until Hal provides credence to them.

I don't think so. Asking the question about the question challenges him to provide credence whether or not there is an answer. If he doesn't have any examples, then my questions are still valid.

[WestCoastRunner]

I don't think so. Asking the question about the question challenges him to provide credence whether or not there is an answer. If he doesn't have any examples, then my questions are still valid.

Ok, So Hal? And if he doesn't respond, I'm not wasting my time on his post. And the reason I won't waste my time is because he doesn't address anything relevant.

Edited June 14, 2015 by WestCoastRunner