“A Poet Laureate is a poet officially appointed by a government and often expected to compose poems for state occasions and other government events.” What would be the scientific equivalent, a Science Laureate? A scientist officially appointed by a government and often expected to perform experiments (Mentos and DietCoke?) for state occasions and other government events? If so, Bill Nye should get the title.
But, seriously. In the USA, the poet laureate title is supposedly given only for the quality of the poetry irrespective of the poet’s public persona, social activism, political orientation and telegenicity. If we stick to that criterium for a science laureate and award the title only according to the quality of one’s science then… hey, how about all those Nobel Prize winners?
Yet, there is a popular notion that a poet laureate is SUPPOSED to become a public persona, to advocate for causes and to introduce people to poetry on top of being a fantastic poet. If we take that meaning for science, than Razib, John and Josh‘s idea to nominate E.O.Wilson is right on – a good scientist, a well-known and liked one, author or popular books and public persona. Neil deGrasse Tyson is another good choice. But, I’d go for Stephen Hawking – perhaps the best known scientist in the USA today, as well as, as far as I can tell from a biologist’s perspective, a super-duper-top-star scientist himself.

]]>