brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Bob LeChevalier lojbab at
Wed Aug 21 20:27:50 EST 2002

"John Knight" <jwknight at> wrote:
>The detailed notes and letters which would have enabled us to know what kind
>of a contribution she made independent of Becquerel and Pierre (and Wilhelm
>C. Röntgen in 1895, Henri Poincaré, Edmond Becquerel, G. Schmidt, Jacques
>Curie, Ernest Rutherford in January 1899, P. Villard in 1900, André Debierne
>in 1899, and William Crookes in 1900) were destroyed, under her
>instructions--with the pretense of avoiding some kind of a "scandal".

More nonsense.  She was known for her contributions before Pierre got
involved, as described on the Nobel web site.  She got her doctorate
for her OWN work, not for Pierre's work.  The French would surely not
have broken precedent and awarded her a doctorate if she had not
earned it on her own.

I noted earlier today when reading about her granddaughter Irene that
she did some sort of study of their research notes.  Another site
mentioned that the notes are in the custody of the Curie Institute,
but that people who wish to even get close to them have to sign a
health waiver because the notes are radioactive.

>Even worse, you're talking about a "gender" which demonstrated on a
>credible, valid, worldwide, scientific study that couldn't even demonstrate
>an ability to even add and subtract.
>In 1891 Maria Sklodowska went to Paris and began to follow the
> lectures of Paul Appel, Gabriel Lippmann, and Edmond Bouty at the
> Sorbonne. There she met physicists who were already well known--Jean
> Perrin, Charles Maurain, and Aimé Cotton. Sklodowska worked far into
> the night in her students'-quarter garret and virtually lived on
> bread and butter and tea. She came first in the licence of physical
> sciences in 1893. She began to work in Lippmann's research laboratory
> and in 1894 was placed second in the licence of mathematical
> sciences.

(This was before Pierre - so much for "ability to add and subtract".) 

>You don't seem to appreciate how LOW girls scored on TIMSS.

You don't seem to appreciate how little we care what you think about
girls and TIMSS.

>Unless you can come up with some solid, credible stastical evidence that
>women like Marie have better intellectual skills than they demonstrated on
>TIMSS, then Marie is a sheer myth.

You have yet to convince some of us that YOU are something other than
a myth.


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list