Oh crp, you may be right tin: Not only today, but even younger before. "In his own studies, Simonton has found results that are far more soothing to the late bloomer: On average, scientists produce their first breakthrough in their 20s, another onetheir biggestin their late 30s and early 40s, and one final one in their 50s." This link blames wives included only for entertainment. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2003/08/17/do_scientists_age_badly/
Hey its worse than I thought, even Beyonce is on the way down, takes a nice photo though. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1162052/Old-age-begins-27--scientists-claim-new-research.html
Back to the real science It seems the age at scientific breakthroughs is increasing. This award winning paper has some interesting points regarding the increasing age at discoveries.
[This is a well-known issue in life science, where the average age for getting your first grant from the National Institutes of Health is 41, says Jones. From the perspective of a bright undergrad, he notes, I can go into molecular biology and get my first grant at 41, or I can go work at an investment bank and retire by then. That worries me.] At least they have a NIH.
So what I see here is that making breakthrough discoveries can go through to the 50's Not much after that and with our aging scientific communities this could be a problem.
At what age you cant recognise a climategate scam is not clear. There is an Aussie company that has demonstrated reversal of age related cognition loss in Alzheimer's.
