I'm very split on this topic. I read this on The Verge[1] and I know they're pretty left-leaning. But to my experience they rarely lie and they made many critic

I'm very split on this topic. I read this on The Verge[1] and I know they're pretty left-leaning. But to my experience they rarely lie and they made many criticisms I find valid. On the other hand, marginalization is another big problem of our age. Let me elaborate. First of all, him stealing research from Rosalind Franklin comment is a bit of a hyperbole. Sure, not asking for her permission before using data and not crediting her at all are major dick moves, but I'm pretty sure he was a brilliant scientist. The quotes from his book The Double Helix don't really help here, they are extremely misogynistic. But The Verge does not mention that in the epilogue of the same book, he said he was usually wrong about Franklin and he acknowledges the hardships she endured as a woman in science.[2] This is just the part about Franklin. The rest of The Verge article mentions about him being a generally horrible person and does not even quote the parts about obese people and genetic screening, so bonus points for them. But one thing we need to consider is that he is old. Really, he is 86. Of course this shouldn't shield him from criticism, but he was born and lived in a different world than ours. Bad behavior should be called out and shunned, but there's a fine line between this and marginalization. We should all be responsible about it. The last thing I want to add is how everyone thinks if you made one great achievement you win all the points. This reminds me a lot about what's going on with Linus Pauling.[3] He did awesome things, yes, but at some point he stopped being a pioneer in science and bullishly promoted benefits of vitamin C even though scientific community was mostly united against it. People want to see them as authority figures even after they age and lose their touch. This is sad, really. But continuing taking them seriously is usually more harm than silently ignoring them. I'm sorry no one takes him seriously anymore. But I understand universities not considering working with him anymore. I understand press not caring about what he says anymore. They all have good reasons. But that's where my pity ends. Him deciding to sell his Nobel medal makes him look like a victim, but as far as I know he didn't do it because he was poor or anything. He wanted to buy a painting, which I'm perfectly fine with. And maybe he wanted a little attention? People get old and sad, which is depressing, but there's not much we can do about it. Sorry for the long comment. [1]: http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/9/7363969/dna-pioneer-james-watson-nobel-returned-richest-man-in-russia http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/9/7363969/dna-pioneer-james-... [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson#Use_of_King.27s_College_results http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson#Use_of_King.27s_Co... [3]: http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/07/the-vitamin-myth-why-we-think-we-need-supplements/277947/?single_page=true http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/07/the-vitami...