It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Woodcarver
Well you have left out the most important part. They have to be good at communicating science. Which means they have to be brilliant in their field and also be a good communicator. There are far more scientist that you have never heard of than there are on tv. The one thing all of these "celebrity scientists" have in common is not only did they all wrote books, but they are outstanding in their respective fields of study. In fact, they have all written articles that were published before anyone outside the scientific community even knew who they were. Stephen hawking was a brilliant mathematician long before you saw his body give way to his illness. Michio kaku built a particle accelerator in his folks garage in highschool. Neil degrasse tyson gave lectures on the stars when he was fifteen. None of these guys were chosen to be celebrities, their discipline, determination, personalities as lecturers and innovative thinkers stood them apart from the rest. I think i see where your getting at, but it's obvious that english isn't your primary language. So i apologise if i am misrepresenting your points.
To compare any one of these guys to a boy band shows your lack of knowledge of their pasts and is very disrespectful of their work and contributions to modern science. a reply to: werewolf99
originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: werewolf99
Thats just it, you can't be a brilliant physisist without knowing how to write and be coherent with your data.
They went to school, earned their degrees, and worked for their "celebrity". They were not "chosen" to be communicators. Bill gates and steve jobs were not chosen to be innovators. They worked for it and forged their own paths.