Rogue Scientist Has Own Scientific Method

[Guest forumfan99]

Rogue Scientist Has Own Scientific Method

 

TALLAHASSEE, FL—Only months after abandoning a tenured position at Lehigh University, maverick chemist Theodore Hapner managed to disprove two of the three laws of thermodynamics and show that gold is a noxious gas, turning the world of science—defined for centuries by exhaustive research, painstaking observation, and hard-won theories—completely on its head.

 

The brash chemist, who conducts independent research from his houseboat, has infuriated peers by refusing to "play by the rules of Socrates, Bacon, and Galileo," calling test results as he sees them, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

 

"If you're looking for some button-down traditionalist who relies on so-called induction, conventional logic, and verification to arrive at what the scientific community calls 'proof,' then I'm afraid you've got the wrong guy," said the intrepid 44-year-old rebel, who last month unveiled a revolutionary new model of atomic structure that contradicted 300 years of precedent. "But if you want your results fast and with some flair, then come with me and I'll prove that the boiling point of water is actually 547 degrees Fahrenheit."

 

Armed with only with a Bunsen burner, a modest supply of chemical compounds, and a balance scale—the last of which Hapner has "yet to find any good reason to use"—this controversial nonconformist defies every standard definition of what a scientist should be. From his tendency to round off calculations, to his rejection of controlled experiments, Hapner is determined to avoid becoming "one of those cowardly sheep who slavishly kowtows to a tired old methodology."

 

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/49180

[gcol]

I just love oddballs, mavericks and eccentrics.

 

Why? Because they:

 

Poke fun at the establishment and upset the smug (always good for a laugh).

 

Prompt the open-minded to continually question accepted dogma, surely a good and scientific thing?

 

In art, there is the photographic and the interpretational. The photographic being factual reproduction, as in traditional landscapes and portraiture, and the interpretational where what you see is an attempt to interpret actuality in a thought provoking way.

 

Perhaps, in his approach, he has a modern art approach to science, asking us to bridge the gap between actuality and imagination.

[Royston]

Perhaps, in his approach, he has a modern art approach to science, asking us to bridge the gap between actuality and imagination.

 

Or he doesn't exist...it's a joke.

[gcol]

Or he doesn't exist...it's a joke.

 

Rather like God, then. If he does not exist, it would be a good idea to invent him.

 

I wanna be a believer!

[The Spith]

Hapner is undoubtedly taking a great risk with his latest study, but the maverick scientist is confident his work will pay off.

 

"Bombarding a plutonium nucleus with accelerated electrons, long believed to produce a nuclear fission reaction, has, in fact, no consequence at all," Hapner said. "I'm going to prove that if it's the last thing I ever do."

 

Hilarious:D

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

The Onion is a satire news site.

 

But it's funny anyways.

[ecoli]

I love the Onion... it's a lot more interesting then real news. And sometimes more believable.

[GutZ]

Armed with only with a Bunsen burner, a modest supply of chemical compounds, and a balance scale—the last of which Hapner has "yet to find any good reason to use"—this controversial nonconformist defies every standard definition of what a scientist should be. From his tendency to round off calculations, to his rejection of controlled experiments, Hapner is determined to avoid becoming "one of those cowardly sheep who slavishly kowtows to a tired old methodology."

 

LMAO, Thats right! stick it to the man!