Berkely alum wins Nobel Prize

<p>Warning: if you are one of the few Berkeley (or public school) haters on this forum then you may not want to read the remainder of this post because it could possibly cause a feeling of anger and/or resentment.</p>

<p>I just would like to point out yet ANOTHER accomplishment of one of the world’s great institutions. A winner of the 2006 Nobel Prize in Physiology, Andrew Fire received his undergraduate degree from Berkeley. </p>

<p>For the record, I am not a Berkeley alum and am in no way affiliated with the school. I just happen to share the common understanding that it is one of the most incredible academic institutions on the face of the planet.</p>

<p>If I heard correctly, he is sharing the award with a scientist from the Univeristy of Massachusettss--another public institution</p>

<p>The CNN article I read quoted him as being affiliated with Stanford... so I'm assuming he's a professor there now.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The CNN article I read quoted him as being affiliated with Stanford... so I'm assuming he's a professor there now.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Money. $$$</p>

<p>He was an undergraduate at Berkeley- class of '78.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2006/10/02_nobel.shtml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2006/10/02_nobel.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://mednews.stanford.edu/fire/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://mednews.stanford.edu/fire/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2006/press.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2006/press.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>But you could have pointed out that the also went to MIT. <em>shrug</em></p>

<p>
[quote]
But you could have pointed out that the also went to MIT. <em>shrug</em>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>He could have also pointed out that he is a prof at that certain school in Palo Alto.</p>

<p>Sakky,</p>

<p>Yes I could have pointed out that he was a professor at Stanford. I just wanted to show that he went to Cal undergrad because there is small handfull of people on this board who really disrespect public schools. Personally, I think Stanford is most likely the greatest university in the US so it is no disrespect to Stanford. I just wanted to point out the Berkeley portion just to rub it in people's faces. By the way, the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded today as well and one of them was a Berkeley professsor and the other was a yet another Berkeley alum. It seems like this happens almost every year. </p>

<p>Hey, I didnt even go to Berkeley. I got in but decided to go to UCLA instead. I have no reason to defend Berkeley because I am in no way affiliated with the school. I just find it funny how 5 or 6 people on this board get their kicks off of disrespecting this great school. You may not remember me but we had quite a few arguments about this stuff in the past. I grew to respect your opinion but did not generally agree with what you believed was important in an education. I believe some things are valuable while you put more emphasis on others. I guess it all boils down to what is best for the individual student. For example, Michigan is not for everyone but then again neither is Brown. I just think that some of the public school bashing around here is quite ignorant. </p>

<p>Sorry to digress. I hope life is treating you well, Sackster.</p>

<p>P.s. Berkeley is still awesome!!</p>

<p>Well in addtion to the Nobel for medicine mentioned above, today the Nobel Prize for physics was awarded, and it went to two Americans. One is a UC Berkeley alum and the other is a current UC Berkeley professor:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2006-10-03-physics-nobel-prize_x.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2006-10-03-physics-nobel-prize_x.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Count How Many Nobel Chicago has.</p>

<p>There was a brief story on NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams (I always watch the netcast if possible) ... it's funny how they only mentioned that Fire was from Stanford University (i.e. if he was a Harvard grad, I'm sure they would have found a way to work that into the story - something like "Andrew Fire, a graduate from Harvard and now a researcher at Stanford ....")</p>

<p>
[quote]
...today the Nobel Prize for physics was awarded, and it went to two Americans. One is a UC Berkeley alum ...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Swarthmore College grad, actually. Physics major with Highest Honors, Class of 1968. Then, got his PhD. at Berkeley. He's currently at NASA's Goddard Center.</p>

<p>The Nobel was for work on the big bang theory.</p>

<p>That's two Swartmore alums winning a Nobel prize in the last three years. Another, a Math major, won the Nobel in Economics in 2004.</p>

<p>Five Swarthmore grads have now won Nobel prizes. Kind of amazing considering that the average graduating class has been around 300.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Right, which as I said makes him a UC Berkeley alum.</p>

<p>Berkeley Parent, do you happen to know how many undergrads are working in that lab?</p>

<p>Berkeley Parent, with all due respect, your post (as well as your handle) only serves to highlight the fact that, at a minimum, you carry just as strong a "pro"-Cal prejudice as any Cal-"hater" bias on these boards. More specifically, it seems that any kind of criticism of Cal - large or small, whether merited or not - will be brushed off as another example of Cal-"hating". </p>

<p>Further, I'm not sure why you felt compelled to single Sakky out - is it because his comments not only cut deep, but are in fact mostly true and are generally backed up with facts/data/evidence? (since we all know that nothing hits harder than the truth). That being said, I feel just as compelled to defend him.</p>

<p>I have a great deal of respect for Sakky, and consider him one of the absolute best posters on this site bar none. Sure he has a Cal-bias, but unlike other would be detractors, he has every right to be since he has direct experience in the matters at hand. I also find it extremely ironic (if not downright hypocritical) that you would attack Sakky on the grounds of "objectivity" when you clearly have none.</p>

<p>But apart from all of that, his insights on many other subjects (i.e. non-Cal topics) are for the most part very well thought out and he usually adds a great deal of value to any given discussion. </p>

<p>In short, CC is a much more informed place due to excellent and active posters like Sakky (who, btw, happens to be very close to posting his 6,000th comment).</p>

<p>"I also find it extremely ironic (if not downright hypocritical) that you would attack Sakky on the grounds of "objectivity" when you clearly have none."</p>

<p>Sakky is not objective. You are not objective. I am not objective. Lets not pretend we are.</p>

<p>I never said that I was (nor did I ever "pretend" to be). I was merely pointing out the borderline hypocrisy of accusing someone of lacking objectivity when the accuser clearly lacks any shred of it.</p>

<p>i initially wrote "bias" to be honest, and then deliberately changed it to "prejudice" - i was trying to make a point - perhaps I was being too harsh on you... i take that back now - let's call it an oversight on my part and call it "bias".</p>

<p>
[quote]
By the way, you are too kind to Sakky. Check out his gratuitous shots at Cal's athletic program to get a sense of how deep is his dislike of Berkeley. Some of the other Berkeley bashers on this forum are overtly ignorant. Sakky, with his veneer of objectivity is much more insidious.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Berkeley Parent, if you have a problem with me about other threads in which I participated, why not debate me on those particular threads? Why are you carrying your antipathy over to this thread? </p>

<p>I haven't mentioned a single word about the Cal athletic program on this thread at all. YOU have. Yet you accuse me of making gratuitous comments?</p>

<p>
[quote]
As I noted elsewhere, all you have to see are his malevolent shots at Cal (Berkeley) athletics to get a sense of how wrong he is on so many issues related to UC Berkeley. It is perfectly appropriate to discount all or part of what a person says when he is shown to be demonstrably wrong in one area. This is not the post to analyze Sakky's comments about Cal sports. But you can take my observation to the bank, that he doesn't know what he is talking about in his periodic comments that deride some aspect of Berkeley's sports programs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I also wonder what exactly it is that I have said that is actually demonstrably wrong, specifically about the Cal athletics program. Since you said that I have been demonstrably wrong, I would like to see you actually demonstrate that wrongness. Please point to a quote where I said something that was factually wrong about Cal athletics. </p>

<p>I believe every comment I've made regarding Cal athletics has been based on freely available and published data. That is why I provide links to my sources. You don't believe what I have said? Fine. Then look at the data and judge for yourself. Or find your own sources of data and present it. Whatever. But if you're going to accuse somebody of being demonstrably wrong, you better be able to prove it. </p>

<p>We all have the right to our own opinions, but we don't have the right to our own facts. I have facts to support my positions. You don't have to believe me. But you do have to believe the data. Data doesn't lie.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Cal had lost funding or a student had been caught cheating or anything that would show it in a bad light, sakky would be the first one to post about it?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh? "The First one"? Let me clue you in. I haven't actually STARTED any threads in months. For example, when Cal got blown out by Tennessee in its first game, which was a pretty bad thing, did I start a thread about it? Go ahead, try to find such a thread that I actually started. You can't do it. I participated in threads that others started, but I didn't start any of my own. So what are you talking about when you say that I am the first to point anything bad out? Similarly, if Cal loses to Oregon this weekend, I promise you that I will be far from the first one to say anything about it. </p>

<p>
[quote]
The reason everyone thinks sakky is out to get Cal (and I am one of those people) is that he seems to only comment on the negatives of Cal

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh? Where exactly were all you guys when I, once again, recently defended the strength of Berkeley's graduate programs against detractors? In fact, this is something that I have done time and time again, but apparently nobody wants to remember it. I don't remember getting any support from any of you guys for that battle. Why is that? I also recently defended Berkeley against that rather ridiculous civil literacy test. But I guess y'all didn't notice that either. Perhaps you didn't WANT to notice it.</p>

<p>Basically, what I see is that whenever I say anything positive about Berkeley, y'all remain silent. When I say saying critical about Berkeley, you guys whine. So, really, at the end of the day, you just want people to only say positive things about Berkeley. </p>

<p>If that's the case, then why not just come right out and say so? Say that you only want people to say positive things about Cal. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Yet where's sakky's post touting the greatness of Berkeley when in two days three people associated with the university are awarded nobel prizes?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why exactly is it MY job to tout Berkeley's Nobels? I see that other people seem to be doing that job just fine. Furthermore, I could just as easily be touting the greatness of Stanford, MIT, and Harvard who also have claims to the recent Nobels. Do you see me doing that? In fact, I haven't touted ANY schools for ANY of the recent Nobels. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Sakky doesn't even think Cal is a "good" school,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>See, there you go again, taking my posts out of context. I see that many people have recently said that Cal is horrid or abysmal, but the necessary context to understand those comments was that this was a discusion regarding the football team's performance in the Tennessee game. I asked you to provide context around when I supposedly alleged that Cal wasn't a 'good' school before, and you conspicuously declined. So I'll ask you for it again. </p>

<p>But since I expect you to decline again, allow me to provide the context. The Cal undergrad program is not good, relative to that of the top private schools. I think few people would dispute this notion. However, Cal's grad programs, and the PhD programs in particular, are top-of-the-line. </p>

<p>Look, if you want to fling around accusations of 'bias', then you have to be willing to apply it to ALL posters about Berkeley, including yourselves. It is not my job, nor is it anybody else's job to talk about every single thing that ever happens with Berkeley or any other subject. Instead, each of us chooses to talk about the particular topics that we think are important. It is through a wide set of opinions that readers can ascertain the truth. You guys seem to just want to engage in censorship of opinions you don't like.</p>

<p>(Edited to remove response to now-deleted post. Mod Amistad)</p>