To my understanding, he also very conveniently fudged a few of his experiments so that they would align with his other ones and ended up embellishing his final result, but also if he hadn’t done that he wouldn’t have discovered Mendelian genes? Not sure if that’s a win or a loss for science.
Comment on Big Science
TankieTanuki@hexbear.net 1 month agoMy favorite example is Gregor Mendel. He wasn’t a scientist. He was a monk with no degrees of any kind. But he did science—legendary science—which means he actually was a scientist.
Allero@lemmy.today 1 month ago
I’d say he was a scientist - just not an academic :)
HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Damn right…
“This germ theory nonsense violates the academic truth of spontaneous generation and just sounds like crackpottery, now if you excuse me I need to drill into a man’s skull to balance his humors.” - Academia in the 1700’s