this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2024
329 points (96.6% liked)

Science Memes

10950 readers
2390 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
329
#justwomeninstemthings (mander.xyz)
submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/jun/23/sexism-in-science-did-watson-and-crick-really-steal-rosalind-franklins-data

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The 1st myth is that watson and crick figured out the solved the double helix by themselves. The 2nd myth is that they stole Rosalind Franklin's work and screwed her over. Both are misconceptions propagated by pop culture and Watson's own embellishments...

Franklin was a great crystallographer who contributed many key insights into the characteristics of the double helix. There were many brilliant scientists working on this problem at the time pushing technology to their limits to gain every piece of information we could about DNA's structure.

Franklin was a big name in her own right, and to say that Watson and Crick could figure out the double helix by stealing picture 51, whereas Franklin could not, implies that she couldn't figure out her own data, and is frankly insulting to her intellect.

This article explains it much better than I ever could: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01313-5

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Long but great read, thanks