Friday, 3 Oct

2003 IgNobels:

Has it been a year already? Who knows. Not these people: the 2003 IgNobel Prizes for ‘research achievements that should not be repeated’ have been announced. Topping last year’s leading entry, ‘a more accurate method for approximating the surface area of elephants’, should have been a hard sell, but “an analysis of the forces required to drag sheep over various surfaces” comes pretty darn close. “Chemical investigation of a bronze statue that fails to attract pigeons” is another good one. These people still need to find something better to do.

* * *

The problem with these awards, awards that reward ineptitude and resource wasting, is that they actually encourage participation. Many people are so desperate for attention and the chance for award that they will purposefully set out to achieve nothing, wasting time and money along the way, as superbly demonstrated by the IgNoble Awards.

And besides, measuring the surface area of an elephant - isn’t that technically impossible, like measuring the length of coastline along the British Isles? As in, it is an infinite regression - your measurement could always be a little more accurate and therefore the length longer?

No, I guess not. You could always skin an elephant and do it that way - how about research into comparative methodolgies: cat skinning vs. elephant skinning? I’ve heard there’s more than one way to do the former, so how about the latter?

Chris | October 3, 2003 12:45 PM
* * *

You’re right Chris. I agree that this sort of thing leads to wasteful behaviour. You wouldn’t catch any of the mad scientists on my payroll participating in this nonsese. No sir, it would serve as a clear indication that they weren’t doing the job I hired them for, and they’d be out on their ear.

I only mention it for the chuckle factor.

Elephant skinning? You do realise we’re talking about an endangered animal here don’t you. Perhaps I should file a report ;)

Ryan | October 3, 2003 04:40 PM
* * *

For I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand. For this I believe — that unless I believe, I should not understand. by online casino games

online casino | December 8, 2004 11:52 AM
* * *

poker me up

poker me up | January 1, 2005 01:26 AM
* * *

poker me up

poker me up | January 1, 2005 01:26 AM
* * *









    forget!




All content copyright © 2002 of Ryan Carter