Science is not science unless you can get hard data to back up your theories. For getting some solid data regarding the composition of comets beneath their surface, this was, honestly, a pretty cheap and easy method.

She came across cavalierly dismissive of the value of such "pure science" research, and was cavalierly dismissed in turn.

But then again, "attacking a comet never fed a hungry child", if you're into that sort of thing.

I'm not defending her position, which I do not happen to agree with. But if she happens to be wrong, it is not on account of her gender.

Actually I am into that kind of thing...And it truly was an opinion piece and I don't think that learning of the composition of comets was worth the cost. I believe there are many more theories that could have used hard data and those millions could have been better spentl. Opinion. And my opinion is not related to my gender. ALthough the endeavor was a success you might want to remember that there was a possibility they would completely MISS the comet....would everyone feel the same if they had missed???

Also forgot to say Great Job!

Atilla, true true, but I got the impression from your post that I'd find the place awash in neanderthal testosterone when I got there.

Not that I was disappointed, but there wasn't much to tweak, as I had hoped.

My mom's a scientist--or, rather, should have been. Her boyfriend, a world-famous genetics professor, talked her into giving it up and remaining a schoolteacher.

So I'm a little sensitive to people who proclaim that women can't do science and math. A lot of us choose not to, which is a different thing entirely.

My own opinion is informed by my scientist friends, who tell me that "general research" is the hardest thing to fund, and the most important thing to do.

It's an unfortunate stereotype. And the more so that some women choose to play into it for their own advantage in other areas.

As a sharp contrast to the stereotype, I am reminded of the young lady who sat across from me in my college physics courses. She was decidedly not sympathetic to the then current feminist ideology, and sharp as a tack. Between breezing through her physics problem sets and aceing the tests, she could be seen in the cafeteria reading the latest Danielle Steele novel. And she was on her way to Embry Riddle University to become an astronaut. Sharp, and hot, and feminine, and ambitious. I tell ya...

Another contrast was a woman in my upper division engineering classes. If you met her outside of class, you might be tempted to think "sociology major". Kind of dingy and silly--she played right into the stereotypes. But she was an engineering whiz who earned a high GPA, and last I spoke with her after graduation she was working for a local consulting firm.

So I know it's BS. Generalizations aren't going to tell you much about the specific person you're dealing with.

Yup.

cool site.