Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Mullis

From: Damien Broderick <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 17:36:39 -0500

At 09:42 PM 3/16/2007 +0000, BillK wrote:

>On 3/16/07, Damien Broderick wrote:
> > I now
> > await the character assassination this will attract to Mullis, as it
> > has already to Josephson.
>
>Oh dear. Please don't quote Mullis as a reference.
>
>No need for a character assassination. He does it himself.

My comment was, of course, ever so faintly tongue in cheek. On the 
other hand, common attacks on Mullis are not the kind that would 
necessarily be prized (as it were) on this list:

>He thought OJ Simpson was innocent

Wikipedia glosses this:
<Mullis became known to a wider public as a potential forensic DNA 
analyst and witness for the defense in the O.J. Simpson murder case. 
News coverage of Mullis, his activities and his background was 
extensive. The defense moved to prevent a cross-examination of his 
personal life including "social relationships, domestic discord and 
use of  controlled substances." >

Oh no! Not *controlled substances*! You can see what kind of deranged 
lunatic this must be. (I, naturally, have myself very rarely inhaled.)

>Also see
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_Mullis>
>where the controversy about his Nobel prize is discussed.

He had a great idea. Some other people had inklings of the great idea 
too. Boo hoo. His team didn't get to share the prize. Well, I have 
sympathy for that view, being a low communitarian anarchist rather 
than a studly libertarian like many on this list, but hey, it's the 
way the Nobel Prize was set up. Boo hoo.

Bill makes some good points. But: This guy has had some odd 
experiences and some odd ideas. One side-consequence of being a 
creative genius.

Damien Broderick 

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat