Esther Crawley gets 'commendation' at 2017 Maddox Prize awards.

'Alem Matthees' especially seems clearly written all over this.
Would he really want to be associated with such a band of self-congratulatory self-serving ethically corrupt morally bankrupt malodorous imposters?

I have already decided that if I am ever offered a knighthood I shall decline on principle, but I suppose each must act in such matters according to their own conscience.
 
@TiredSam Do you have a view as to what contribution that your future knighthood would be in recognition of?

I think you should graciously accept any offer to be in the big tent. While you are in there could you lobby to strip all the assets from the monarchy, modernise the House of Lords including removing the ability of the prime insisted to nominate his wife's hairdresser for a peerage and use the proceeds/savings to fund the NHS? I think hesseltine can go ...he never shows up anyway so doesn't really earn his money.
 
@TiredSam Do you have a view as to what contribution that your future knighthood would be in recognition of?
To be honest I haven't done anything that puts me in the running yet, I just like to be prepared for all eventualities.

@TiredSam I think you should graciously accept any offer to be in the big tent. While you are in there could you lobby to strip all the assets from the monarchy, modernise the House of Lords including removing the ability of the prime insisted to nominate his wife's hairdresser for a peerage and use the proceeds/savings to fund the NHS? I think hesseltine can go ...he never shows up anyway so doesn't really earn his money.
Probably simplest if I just refuse rather than join the establishment vowing to changing things from the inside. That could go horribly wrong.
 
I agree with @large donner. The agenda must be advanced "in the name of science". It's a bit like the nobel prize - it's political now, not scientific.

I get more and more the feeling, we live in anti age of enlightenment. :(

Here's a critical article about SAS, but an older one:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/jan/05/sense-about-science-celebrity-observations

I didn't find specifics, but the "About us" section shows in my opinion that certain interests are represented, and I am certain these are not scientific ones.

http://archive.senseaboutscience.org/pages/board-of-trustees.html
(See also "funding")

Wesseley is a member of the advisory council.
 
I’m trying to get my head around why an organisation would give such a prize - what is the point of it? And this makes the most sense to me!
Self serving organisation using self serving ‘scientists’ to self promote.
Can't help thinking there's a lot of funny handshakes going on behind the scenes. Probably virtual funny handshakes these days.
 
Sir John Maddox, whose name this prize commemorates, was a passionate and tireless champion and defender of science, engaging with difficult debates and inspiring others to do the same.
[My bold]

http://senseaboutscience.org/activities/the-john-maddox-prize/

Errm ... where does EC engage with any difficult debates? Or example for others to follow? And as for the following bullet points, she has clearly pulled the wool over so many eyes.
The prize is open to nominations for any kind of public activity, including all forms of writing, speaking and public engagement, in any of the following areas:
  • Addressing misleading information about scientific or medical issues.
  • Bringing sound evidence to bear in a public or policy debate.
  • Helping people to make sense of a complex scientific issue.

http://senseaboutscience.org/activities/maddox-nominations/

Could we give serious consideration to nominating someone next year? There are a good few possibilities, and there should be enough ability available to us to construct a very convincing and well put together case. Even if it didn't get anywhere, it might help shed some light in darker corners.
 
Back
Top Bottom