There is also the "Crackpot Index" by physicist John Baez:
Stephen Hawkins in his book The Theory of Everything complained that
science had become too complicated for philosophers and in conclusion
had this to say:
from the index:
"8. 5 points for each mention of "Einstien", "Hawkins" or "Feynmann"."
"However, if we discover a complete theory, it should in time be
understandable in broad principal by everyone, not just a few
scientists. Then we shall all be able to take part in the discussion of
why the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason. For thin we should know the mind of
Einstein's theories and the string theories are too complicated as
Hawkins observed. Mine is not.
"29. 30 points for suggesting that a famous figure secretly disbelieved in a
theory which he or she publicly supported. (E.g., that Feynman was a closet
opponent of special relativity, as deduced by reading between the lines in
his freshman physics textbooks.)"
(Hawking is, of course, not an opponent of Einstein's theories--most of his
work is in General Relativity, and the overlap of that theory with quantum
physics. The quote does not say that theories of physics should be rejected
for being 'too complicated', it simply says that once we have a unified
theory it can be explained in simplified terms to nonspecialists, just as
his book tries to do with relativity and quantum physics.)
I understand it took four years before people began to accept Einstein's
theories. If you guys had been around a hundred years ago, you would
probably have sent this link to him!
"18. 10 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Einstein, or
claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided
(without good evidence). "
(Actually Einstein's ideas were accepted pretty quickly, and even those who
disagreed with them did not accuse him of failing to understand existing
physics or of being a crackpot)