It is true that Scully is the best female scientist I've seen on tv. I have no comprehension why Dr. Saunders is on the "not" side of the x-axis though.

If this was an accurate representation I think the lower right would be the most heavily populated quadrant. :(

Sunfire | October 09, 19:10 CET

Okay, that's almost inscrutable, but it's strange that Amy Acker's virtually same character could both be "plausible", but only one of them is "hot". Very strange, almost as strange as categorizing Whiskey as a scientist separate from Dr. Saunders.

CaptainB | October 09, 19:22 CET

Very odd list. Apparently the not-hot/implausible list is just "the sucky movie" list.

BrownCoat_Tabz | October 09, 19:33 CET

If this was an accurate representation I think the lower right would be the most heavily populated quadrant. :(

Err, it is isn't it ?

Scully was a plausible scientist (and GA is certainly hot) though I don't think she was a particularly good scientist - too dogmatic in her scepticism. Nice to see Amanda Tapping on there, after a few teething problems early on where she seemed to be a 1 dimensional feminist mouthpiece Sam Carter really became a great, rounded character who was smart, tough, professional, attractive and funny without ever becoming a "man in a dress".

The most glaring omission for me is Jodie Foster in 'Contact'. Hot and plausible, mosdef.

(i'm assuming Amy Acker no. 3 should actually be Fred rather than Whiskey - most assuredly both hot and plausible IMO, especially the way she'd get carried away talking about subjects without realising just how bored the people around her were. Been there, done that, didn't look as pretty in the process ;)

Saje | October 09, 19:48 CET

Is this in any way related the Hot-Crazy scale?

Jayme | October 09, 20:04 CET

I think the shift in hotness from Dr. Saunders to Whiskey was based entirely on Whiskey's actions in "Vows." Looks stayed the same, but actions can be so deliciously hot.

ManEnoughToAdmitIt | October 09, 21:28 CET

Edited to retract dumb statement.

Totally agree with the Amy Acker weirdness!

[ edited by Ildeth on 2009-10-09 23:43 ]

Ildeth | October 09, 23:44 CET

Somehow you've managed to edit your post before you posted it.

That's special magic that is ;).

Saje | October 10, 00:29 CET

How is Claire less plausible than Whisky (who wasn't even a scientist anyway...), Claire was made to be a scientist. Its like criticising Frankenstein's Monster for not being monstery enough.

Ashley | October 10, 00:37 CET

..wait I don't get that scale. Maybe that's 'cos I'm not really sober.. BUT I mean gosh that chart is complicated!

Basff | October 10, 00:39 CET

Edited to attempt time travel.

[ edited by NotaViking on 1985-10-26 01:21 ]

NotaViking | October 10, 00:42 CET

Epic FAIL ;).

ETProve that Ildeth is still monarch of time and space:
Edited to retract dumb statement.

Totally agree with the Amy Acker weirdness!

[ edited by Ildeth on 2009-10-09 23:43 ]

Ildeth | October 09, 23:44 CET

[ edited by Saje on 2009-10-10 01:20 ]

Saje | October 10, 01:21 CET

OMFG ! I can also travel back in time by one minute ! Together we shall rule the universe from one minute ago !


If only you could buy a lottery ticket one minute before the draw...


ETApologise to Notaviking (neglected to look at the year ;).

[ edited by Saje on 2009-10-10 01:33 ]

Saje | October 10, 01:24 CET

Well, I've always said that a good reason for not getting into time travel is that it's just too confusing ;). That date and time isn't a random choice btw, it's an appropriate reference ;).

NotaViking | October 10, 01:52 CET

Great scott ! After a night's sleep I see that, nice one ;).

Saje | October 10, 08:53 CET