The Royal Society could have avoided all of this by applying their *own criteria* for excellence when Musk 1st considered for membership.

Instead they - rather unscientifically - mistook name brand recognition and fortune as indicators of scientific merit.

(The ASA's award to Brooks is of a kind.)
Reposted from Kim Weeden
I can't get over the idea that the Royal Society thinks Musk is a scientist.

He is NOT a scientist, either by training or by accomplishments. He is a venture capitalist who has a good nose for which of other people's scientific inventions can be monetized with the aid of government funds.

Comments