He also got hilariously lucky in what he was doing. It’s worth a read into the modern-day reproductions (no pun intended) of his work to see just how unlikely he was to get his results as fast as he did.
Have you got any links? A quick search didn’t show up anything in that direction, only how important Mendel was for modern genetics…
This sums it up pretty well. Its, of course, not guaranteed that any fishy or particularly lucky happened, but it’s a lot simpler if it did
I believe he cooked his data, but it was the 1850s, and science was still along these lines:
Watson, do you think a monkey falling out of a tree falls slower or faster than one blown out of a tree with 00 buckshot?
I do say, Alfred, what an intriguing idea. I’ll grab the shotgun and you find a rock. We will meet back here in 15 minutes and find two monkeys.
15 minutes later
Alright, on the count of three, you throw the rock at your money and I’ll pull my triggerBut it’s going to take time for the rock to get there - your shotgun is instant
Fine you throw on two, and I pull on three. Ready? One, two…
https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esw058
He did a little massaging of the data.
There is a German word for this: Erbsenzähler (pea counter), someone who is overly rigerous, exact or cheap.
I don’t think that is applicable here…
You shall not think, you shall count (the peas)
The Danish word is fly fucker - somehow the Danes predicted banana fly geneticists.
Fly…Fuck…er…
Somehow that seems worse than a goat fucker.
I don’t know where I read/listen it, but I have the memory of learning that he wanted to use rats for his experiments but the church didn’t wanted to pay for the rats so he has to do it with peas.
I went to college for horticulture four years ago. They still use this confusing rhetoric.
Why does this guy look like Doug Heffernan lol
Switched to melons
Not my proudest fap
Ok, now try with hawkweed.
