Arguments
Just Deserts: Winning the 2011 Eureka Prize
Posted on 10 September 2011 by Bern
This post was drafted by SkS reader/contributor Bern and represents the entire team of SkS contributors
The Eureka Prizes, presented annually since 1990 by the Australian Museum, have been described as Australia’s “Oscars of Science”. The prizes recognise and reward excellence in the fields of scientific research & innovation, science leadership, school science and science journalism & communication.
The prizes are sponsored by a wide range of government departments & research organisations, universities, foundations, media organisations and corporations.
Skeptical Science’s founder John Cook tweeted on Tuesday that he was attending the gala presentation dinner:
Heading off to #EurekaPrize evening. Exciting & a little surreal
As long-time readers of and participants at Skeptical Science, we were delighted to see the follow-up message:
Am blown away, @skepticscience just won Eureka Prize 4 Advancement of Climate Change Knowledge
The official announcement gives a great rundown of why Skeptical Science was chosen as the winner, despite some stiff competition.
Bern would like to give a shout out and a great big “Congratulations!” to John and the supporting crew of contributors, discussion thread participants & moderators here at Skeptical Science. It’s well deserved recognition for what is, in his opinion, one of the most useful sites in the world of Climate Science.
The Skeptical Science team of contributors would also like to congratulate John on the well-deserved recognition of his success in creating and developing SkS, and providing continued excellent leadership in guiding the SkS team. We will strive to continue providing content at the level which helped the site win the Eureka Prize.
Other coverage
- ABC Australia
- Climate Progress
- Friends of Gin & Tonic
- Hot Topic
You are entitled to boast a bit!
And I would add to that my sincere thanks for everything they've done to promote education about climate change and its ramifications. This site is a fantastic resource for anyone interested in the subject.
Can't help but notice that Certain Names aren't adding to the congrats. They certainly jump on the other threads fast enough.
That was until about a month ago when I fisrt looked at SkS. This website really "opened my eyes" at how logical and clear/unrefuttable are the findings of climate science about AGW. The debate should not be called "balanced" when most "skeptics" are simply denialist.
Congrats John and the rest of the team!
But I tend to think they are 'just desserts', not 'just deserts'.
Cheers
However, a quick google reveals that since the concept is derived from 'deserve' that's the spelling; it's just pronounced as though one was likely to receive a parfait!
Congratulations John.
mandas: I didn't come up with the headline, and I too thought it was a typo, until I looked it up. Just goes to show, you learn something new everyday!
If you just look at climate sensitivity, various evidence ranges from 1.5 to 8 degrees. Sealevel rise equally: from 30 cm to 4 meters by 2100. Etc, Etc. No, science is clearly not one-sided.
However, I agree if you look at it from a distant septic vs science perspective. Afterall, science is pretty one-sided in accepting that CO2 a greenhouse gas and that more of it contributes to warming. ;-)
Congrats everyone - great achievement, and I'm glad John and SkS are finally getting the attention they deserve.
Nice vision John and great follow through.
Well how about that. I stand corrected. You learn something new every day.