<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Oct 20, 2010, at 2:19 PM, Damien Broderick wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>I haven't looked into this closely, but did any of those journals (or their 19 century equivalents) rush to publish Madame Skłodowska–Curie's results? [...] Her paper, giving a brief and simple account of her work, was presented for her to the Académie on 12 April 1898 </div></blockquote><div><br></div>I am unaware of any major problem, and if some of Madam Curie's papers were delayed by a few months it wasn't because of the nature of her science but prejudice regarding the nature of her gender. We do better nowadays. And looking back on it in 2010 it's a matter of little consequence, the science of nuclear physics has still advanced enormously in the last 112 years in spite of it, but the "science" of psi has not advanced a nanometer since April 12 1898 and the reason is that it is not a science, it is Bullshit.<br><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>Did investors plunge into schemes to use radioactivity for power?<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div>How to practically generate power from Curie's discovery was NOT obvious, how to generate money from Bem's "discovery" IS obvious; or it would be if were true. </div><div><br></div><div> John K Clark<br><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br> by her former professor, Gabriel Lippmann.[19]><br><br>Damien Broderick<br>_______________________________________________<br>extropy-chat mailing list<br><a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat<br></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>