This is even less relevant (also: since you mention a percentage - what is it and where have you derived it from?)
You can look at the degree demographics on Wallstreet or Silicon Valley for one thing. It should also be self evident that people who have been trained in Linear Algebra, Stats, Applied Maths and/or Computer Science have a significant advantage.
Data scientists are highly educated – 91% have at least a Master’s degree and 48% have PhDs
The typical data scientist profile is as follows: He is a male who speaks one foreign language, has four and a half years of overall work experience (median), works with R and/or Python, and holds a Master’s and/or a PhD degree.
Your assertion is that degrees are needed for Data Scientists.
I'm saying that they prove nothing.
This above two lines aren't inconsistent, yet for some reason you think they are.
Problem solving skills (creativity is severely lacking in rote learners IMO) and coding skills are far more valuable in my experience (which is 'extensive' given that this is an emergent field.)
Your whole argument appears to hinge on the idea that people with degrees are rote learners, are less inclined to be creative and have weaker coding skills. This is patently false.
You need the understanding of the principles and the ability to implement them, a BSc does not equate to this. The ability to do this is mutually exclusive from any degree. That is my assertion.
Your first sentence is correct, but your second sentence is quite simply nonsense.
Out of interest: how long have you been in out of university and in the workforce?
A little north of 20 years.
And how many total permanent DS's?
Last edited: