The put-him-in-your-pocket-and-take-him-home Professor Brian Cox uses this year’s Huw Wheldon Memorial Lecture to address the main challenges in bringing science to television. His speech addresses the problems that he faced in his own series for momentarily dismissing astrology and Dr Ben Goldacre’s treatment in the press around the MMR vaccines. He also visits the documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle which Cox describes as “factually total bollocks” even though he defends the right of the makers to broadcast it.
Via AMB
"
Good video, good explanations of what Science is too. The people against vaccines are just crazy, and blaming them on autism is wrong, especially when there are a million other things that could be the cause, including the alcohol millions of parents intake while pregnant, but it wouldn’t be the alcohol, nope, it has to be those vaccines.
“Factually total bollocks”… Brilliant.
My favourite ever Brian Cox quote is “Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a twat”. So when I met him, I asked him to sign his book with “John, no it won’t you twat. Brian Cox”, which he laughingly did.
Top bloke, a Carl Sagan for the 21st Century…
Hooray for Brian Cox!
Mark: Or just plain old bad genetics, but people don’t like having no-one to blame.
Goldacre: “…because the media choose not to cover the evidence that goes against their scare story.”
Good point, but sounds familiar, doesn’t it? How about climate change scare stories?
You should watch Brian Cox in the next episode of the lecture. Perhaps his experience of peer review in physics is different from that of many other areas of science – where reviewers are not always independent, more like pal review. Striking examples are found in the climategate emails (if you trouble yourself to read them in their proper context). For another example, just read this recent post on Steve McIntyre’s blog.
Give me Richard Feynman anyday.
Today’s science would learn a lot from his example.
In my earlier post I forgot to give the link:
http://climateaudit.org/2010/12/02/odonnell-et-al-2010-refutes-steig-et-al-2009/
I wonder whether Damian Carrington at the Guardian will bother to post a correction to his earlier article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jan/21/global-warming-antarctica
Unlikely, as the correction would contradict the scare story.
Cox is a joy to watch. He appeals to my three year old too.
You should watch Brian Cox in the next episode of the lecture. Perhaps his experience of peer review in physics is different from that of many other areas of science – where reviewers are not always independent,
That is one pretty physicist…
ha codifier I was thinking the same thing.
Brian Cox tries to live up to the image of his heroes (Sagan, Feynman). However, his is obviously a lesser genius, and what is more damming to him is his narrow view when it comes to understanding fellow human.
His constant smiling is facade to hide pain inside him. His judgmental comments reveal masked pettiness, a nasty character flaw for someone posing as science popularizer.
He still speaks with voice of truth most of the time. However, he has still some growing up to do, wisdom to be gained. He is pretending be beyond his evolution.
When he says “of course there is no problem with vaccination”, we can hear the same zeal what can be hear with his ‘opponents’. He has his religion, astrology community have their religion. Brian is just more functional, more aware.
I have been searching for this type of post for some time. I am publishing a school report about this and this is going to help me. Thank you.