Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Mining Cholesterol -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Charters who wrote (339)	10/25/2007 8:57:15 AM
From: DennyKrane	Respond to of 356

An older couple at an art exhibition were staring at a painting that had them completely confused. The painting depicted three well hung black men totally naked sitting on a park bench. Two of the figures had black penises, but the one in the middle had a pink penis. They asked the curator of the gallery for an interpretation. He explained how it represented the sexual emasculation of African Canadians in a predominately white, patriarchal society. In fact, he pointed out, some serious critics believe that the pink penis also reflects the cultural and sociological oppression experienced by gay men in contemporary society. After the curator left, a man with a noticeable maritime accent and a large Tim Horton's Coffee approached the couple and said: "Would you like to know what the painting is really all about?" The couple looked at the man with some degree of suspicion.... "How and why," asked the couple, "could you claim to be more of an expert than the curator of this gallery?" Because I'm the guy who painted it", he replied. "In fact, there's no African Canadians shown here at all. They're just three Cape Breton coal miners. The guy in the middle went home for lunch".

To: E. Charters who wrote (339)	10/25/2007 4:08:09 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 356

THE most basic mistake of Pauling's proposed DNA structure was that he proposed 3, rather than 2, strands of DNA in the helix. That was disqualifying by itself. Had he seen Franklin's X-ray crystallography results for DNA, they would have undoubtedly cleared his thinking and he most likely would have come up with a more reasonable (and maybe the correct) structure. exploratorium.edu Learning that Pauling was also after the structure lit a fire under Watson and Crick and really got them going. Even they admit that. Many scientists consider that Franklin should also have been included in the prize along with Watson and Crick, but she was not because she was a woman. Watson and Crick did their very best to downplay her role and that may also have entered.