MiNdBaBY
|
| Joined: 16 Mar 2005 |
| Posts: 40 |
|
2093.46 Points
|
|
|
re: real chemist
Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:46 am |
|
|
LOL
90-10 huh? That's a fair guess..
But you forgot an element and aspect of the issue which is:
The percentage of 'Chemists' in training, and after what level or extent of education, such person, becomes a 'chemist' by term.
So, please tell MiNd, at what point, and what extent of education, you consider necessary to be a 'chemist'?
As for MiNd himself, being considerably proud (egotistical), MiNd still only calls himself an 'aspiring chemist' to others..
And in all reality, when you compare the knowledge or experience of any 'chemist' to that which currently (at that point in time) exists with regard to chemistry related knowledge and/or experience, NO 'CHEMIST' is could even fairly call themselves a chemist if you recognize that there doubtfully exists any chemist which knows 50% or more of the knowledge/information existing related to chemistry (Org & Inorg) at that point in time..
All we chemists, especially your 'real chemists', are merely individuals with some previous education and experience at varying levels, who are {humorously} nothing more than cooks who can follow a recipe out of a book..
Think about it.. The only difference between your real chemists and the avg. idiotic wannabe chemist (such as a good portion of forums users) is that the 'real chemist' can read, interpret, and follow a synthesis (published 'recipe')..
'Real chemists' share and distribute there own 'recipes' and research with other chemists via trade journals, which are kinda of an 'inside' thing to the chemistry field..
Nevermind, MiNd will quit while daylight still remains.. |
|