Nobel preace prize becomes a woody joke

Sander Vesik wrote:

In sci.space.policy Rand Simberg wrote:

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:45:18 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
Sander Vesik made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Why would there be any relevance as to what a Nobel Prize winner thinks
of the US and CIA?

I simply find it interesting that the committee chose to give the
prize to a nut.


The prizes are given for past achievements - the recepient needs to be
alive (and precicely how alive hasn't been tested really so far), whetver
they can achieve anything in the "here and now", including poissibly
come up with their own acceptance speech or equvalent is a secondary matter.

Considering the age and eccentricity of some of the recepients, it has
IMHO gone quite well so far ;-)

That is right. The recipient doesn't have to be sane and he didn't
need to be sane at the time when he made his noteworthy past
achievement. Case in point is John F. Nash Jr. who won the
1994 Nobel in economics though he is schizophrenic and was at
the time he developed his economic theory leading to the prize.
The prize comity was well aware of his mental illness when
they chose to give him the prize. I don't think there is any
problem with that. If the person has done something worthy of
a Nobel prize he can have it even if there are some trouble spots
in his life.

Alain Fournier