1. clock
  2. TIME's most influential people of the year

TIME's most influential people of the year

By clock on April 26, 2007.

They are asking you to rate them here.

I have never heard of about half the people on the list - perhaps they are 'influential' in their small circles. Others are celebrities, and they may be influential in distracting people from things that matter. Some used to be influential in the past, or are influential abroad but not here. PZ suggests everyone gives Dawkins a 100%. Sure - the only scientist on the list (although they call him, gasp, an "evolutionist"!!!!).

Watch out - the stuff loads really slowly and it is too easy to give a 50% when your intention is to give a different rating. I have only voted for Elizabeth Edwards (who have since slipped from 14th to 34th place!) because she is the only one I know in person and the only one to have commented on my blog.

Tags
society

More like this

On Edwards, Bloggers, and Religion
Ah, why do I have to be so busy on a news-filled day (no, not Anna Nicole Smith)? I barely saw the computer today. I'd get home, have about 5 minutes before I have to go out again and so on. NPR did not mention Edwards until 4pm or so (that I heard in the car), so when I first got home I only had…
Which Googleois Do I Put In What Google+ Circles?
People on Google+ are discussing what to do with their circles. Here, I'm not going to explain what circles are; I wish merely to record for the moment what I'm doing with them on my account for others to consider and criticize. If you don't know what circles are, join Google+ and find out, and…
The Unending Kwok
I thought I was being a nice guy by not blocking John Kwok the moment he tried to friend me on Facebook. But that was a mistake. At first, there was only the occasional strange note from him via Facebook "email." But then, several hours ago, the dam broke and the Kwok just poured in. The…
Another despicable abuse of a dead celebrity
I was originally going to switch it up and blog about something other than cancer. In fact, there is a particularly juicy bit of anti-vaccine nonsense that I wanted to write about because it shows the utter mendacity of a certain anti-vaccine website that, believe it or not, is not Age of Autism. I…

I think there are a few other scientists on the list, though it's incredible America-centric (and the voters obviously don't understand the concept of 'most influential').

Thanks for the heads-up. I voted for Dawkins. Gave him a rating in the 90's. Not 100% because the state of science literacy globally (and probably the state of American culture in particular) demonstrate that he clearly hasn't had enough influence, alas. (I confess I gave Steve Jobs a higher ranking. I see iPods in ears everywhere I go in NYC. For that matter, I see people reading Harry Potter books all of the time, too. But, I don't think I've ever seen a copy of "The God Delusion" in somebody's hand. The book sold well; but, where are they all?! Maybe people only read Dawkins' books in private. *grin.*)

Psst, Svante Pääbo is a human geneticist. And I think Thierry Henry works in ballistics.

Bob