Science is in the Eye of the Beholder; but in the Mouth of the Professor (AMx ReBorN)

Analysis is given based on what we can see - it doesn't always include Insight; but often calls for it. 
Likewise those with a strong familiarity in a given field; those who have taken more than just an interest but as well a passion - these are the beholding geniuses. They are the people who do not strive on desire or neuroticism alone but rather those who have developed an almost cold passion for the given subject. One not colorless but one that is patient and yet consuming. Your science is my blindness, but my science is not your place to be . Those who flood themselves with knowledge and make it a point - NOT  to others but to THEMSELVES  become masters of their area of interest / subject field. 

Those with relatively benign encounters with scientific individuals or those who go after small bits of information based on a one-time bout of curiosity do not develop the strongest proclivity to their field. Because it can't just relate to oneself to develop that sort of consistency. Those who 'catch on' and DO NOT obsess over this mental mirage "so many know about this stuff, what difference would it be If I know when I can just ask" can be inclined to find things that others do not - and have a chance to be successful...you can't always be worried about competition - and you shouldn't compete unless you know for SURE that...

• You have an advantage or new ideas COUPLED with the education or familiarity in order to make a level-headed argument.  (you must identify  to a degree, lean in acceptability)
• You do not let your emotions dictate the reasons behind your theories and therefore you do not have a biased or imbalanced argument.

I see a lot of potential in many people who write but vocally their stuff  'feel's quite narrow and would be perceived by some as 'autistic' or 'child-like' - simply because there is a lack of organization in their writing and an apparent lack of of control in the beginning statements. 

Blogger's, school attendee's or even some fairly established personna's often make these same mistakes - and not because necessarily that they aren't intelligent but because they have a lack of coherency in part due to emotional voids and the power of those emotions to 'want' instead of the patience to 'consume'. 

Hence the reasons behind Einstein's arguments being not necessarily equivalent to say, Ghandhi. (although both are very wise and make excellent points)

People feel more inclined to accept brevity as sharp intellect, because indeed.

So concise wording is imperative in order to reach a 'higher' level of esteem but also to have affinity to outlets which abide in the motto of "innovation". They who provide such necessary attraction in which rancor can not reside even in those formerly having the strongest disagreement with the delivering entity. In other words - the opposing side can attract minds not easily swayed simply by presenting the right argument, in the 'right' form. 

Easily invigorating the multitudes by simply performing a highlighting contrast to arguments that look more scattered and hopeless.

Now back to the point - all of this was sort of an abstract or detail-oriented way of picking your brains and getting you to absorb rather than REabsorb what others have said while they are busy cutting corners in their topics. It is meant to get you to understand the difference between one who takes enthusiasm and one who is literally, an expert in their field...hence why science can be in the eye of the beholder whilst in the mouth of the professor. The professor; the teacher - he is the one is entitled to respect and is suitable to hold scientific teaching in his words alone..not without former argument necessarily - but he is the one with the edge that has a higher capacity to reel in crowds who may not go with the 'new' if anyone else had spoken about it. The teacher is the wise and is NOT respected BECAUSE of his credentials or 'paperwork' alone but because of the ATTITUDE, the discipline in which forms his confidence...it's because teachers have seen the whole picture and 'learners' are much less likely to grasp things if in too 'free' of an environment..

This does NOT mean that you NEED a license to 'teach' - but best believe if you don't have credentials you will have to sound like you do. You will have to supersede by means of your 'collective' wisdom and most of all - your fervent and timely application of such knowledges.

You must be like a homing missle but one with a rough exterior. Nothing short of amazing.

Most of all, you must set yourself up with ideas that can be somewhat bridged to current evidence (but not copied word for word; paralleled) or teachings and you must be patient whilst you endeavor to create your first small bit of following.

Everything in life has an algorithm, a strategy; if you can not identify WHO you are talking to then your words are meaningless. You can not simply appraise yourself and expect results - you must follow a familiar code and in time - when it is right, deliver innovation and remarks that cause those in your midst to think deeply.

Resolutions also come by good spirit  - and thus it is necessary to 'help' others for more than just leverage, because other wise men can sense a strayer right away.

So deleting your conscience is a 'false' code and likely will not allow you to prosper unless your vision and vigilance can supersede the lack of emotional connection...in other words, you understand the hearts of others and the points they are trying to get at. You understand them and know how to "actively react" to them.

So therein lies the challenge - not everyone will make it ; not everyone will prosper..but the ones who are determined to rise up to the dilemma's and confusion and obfuscated or erroneous CONCLUSIONS - then ostracizing AND replacing them with something more logical but beautiful - these are the real winners. It's also hearty to note that EVEN professors and experts are still always learning, and nothing is quite tangible and even if you argue some things or knowledges are there will always be those who debate against the point.

The difference between enthusiasts, beholders, bro-scientists, geeks and professors or teachers is that professors and teachers don't use only their emotions and are not situationally proficient by definition but adaptable to each new situation..they are flexible, disciplined and incredibly diverse and maintain this because their head is not merely inclined to receive such information; it lives in it.

IN : difference between enthusiasm and expertise, science is in the eye of the beholder, whereby we declare our vision by intellect