... and in some fields, data-mining and informatics-oriented ones, he's simply incorrect about "math doesn't lead to discoveries."
It most certainly can and does.
I do agree with the second quote above, however, I would qualify that to posit that there is a lower limit. That floor should be statistics, and I've known far too many scientists in some of those softer disciplines who lacked that floor. It shows. Painfully.
The problem with Wilson's assertion about "calling on" such experts when you need them is that, er-- you can't know what you don't know. Statistics is so integral to data reduction that one frequently cannot determine significance or even isolate correlations (which is where ideas and hypotheses COME from) successfully without it.
So yeah. Sorry, but if your math skills prove inadequate to manage Gaussian statistics, STEM is (and IMO should be) pretty much closed to you. You're welcome to find a seat in the stands, though, or a different field of play. This simply does not apply to most people with average and up math aptitude, however. I've known people who have managed it even with below-average math skills, truth be told. Sheer force of will and devotion to science can accomplish a lot, even if it will never be effortless.
