Mein Kampf passage passes peer review

[mmj_uk]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8161194/professor-uses-feminist-buzzwords-hitler-mein-jampf-published/

A PROFESSOR is facing the sack after using "feminist buzzwords" to get an entire passage from Hitler’s "Mein Kampf" published in an academic journal.

One, “Our Struggle is My Struggle: Solidarity feminism as an intersectional reply to neoliberal and choice feminism”, was a rewrite of chapter 12 of Hitler’s 1925 autobiography with feminist “buzzwords switched in”.

All the spoofs featured “very shoddy methodologies including incredibly implausible statistics”, as well as “ideologically motivated qualitative analyses” and “claims not warranted by the data”.

More evidence that science has been hijacked by people with ideologies.

Shouldn't it be the peer reviewers who are facing the sack rather than the person exposing the corruption/rot? It's good at least to see some scientists are coming out in his defence and not hiding for fear of being sacked themselves.

 

[platinum87]

How is this science?

 

[BowdonUK]

I've noticed that some extreme left wing ideologues have a fanatical righteousness. They have become what they say they hate.

 

[robgmun]

Brilliant spoof of idiotic feminism, they just want to sack him because they've been shown to be a shallow ***** that they are and don't want the drop in applications for social scienece this bad publicity would generate,

 

[cheesyboy]

I've not read this Sun article, but I heard about this last week. It was a team of (iirc) 3 academics who wrote loads of made-up papers as part of research into the system.

Of course the Mein Kampf one gets fake-newsed

 

[Zatoichi.uK]

There are a few of these. They were supposed to expose just how easy it was to get past peer review into journals when using the right terminology and/or political views.

https://nationalpost.com/news/world...-hoaxsters-got-published-in-academic-journals

lol dog rape

 

[B@Th*nG]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8161194/professor-uses-feminist-buzzwords-hitler-mein-jampf-published/



More evidence that science has been hijacked by people with ideologies.

Shouldn't it be the peer reviewers who are facing the sack rather than the person exposing the corruption/rot? It's good at least to see some scientists are coming out in his defence and not hiding for fear of being sacked themselves.

i don't think you understand what peer review is - it's literally just to wheedle out glaring errors, the content is pretty much irrelevant. I mean you read the sun so i don't know how you can complain about drivel getting published.

B@

 

[CREATIVE!11]

Good troll by him tbh lol.

 

[stockhausen]

I've noticed that some extreme left wing ideologues . . . yadda, yadda, yadda . . .

Yeah, you may have missed the point - "Mein Kampf parody passes peer review" might be a more accurate description.

This just goes to show what utter rubbish can end up in allegedly serious publications - and of course the meeja where most reptiles are on minimum wage, or coke, or tired and emotional, or under the desk, or all of the above

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Mein Kampf passage passes peer review in a junk journal that no one reads or cites

Fixed

 

[MikeTheNative]

There is no way the Sun could accurately report the issues that this is trying to highlight so it's gone for something that it readership might understand - 'Feminists are crazy.... lol'

 

[Ozymandias]

i don't think you understand what peer review is - it's literally just to wheedle out glaring errors, the content is pretty much irrelevant. I mean you read the sun so i don't know how you can complain about drivel getting published.

B@

So obviously no glaring errors in the quality or validity of the papers submitted then. Peer review is more than "glaring error" eradication.

For an overview: https://www.elsevier.com/en-gb/reviewers/what-is-peer-review

My favourite :
“An Ethnography of Breastaurant Masculinity: Themes of Objectification, Sexual Conquest, Male Control, and Masculine Toughness in a Sexually Objectifying Restaurant?”

 

[dowie]

Previous thread on this already, the dog park paper was genius too

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/fake-news-comes-to-academia-warning-sjw-related.18833150/

 

[stockhausen]

Previous thread on this already, the dog park paper was genius too

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/fake-news-comes-to-academia-warning-sjw-related.18833150/

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGEOUS - THESE PEOPLE ARE LEFT-WING SJW LOONY ACADEMICS - HOW DARE THEY?

Ho-Bloody-Ho; it is such fun when the smug, self-righteous evangelicals get their sacred balloons pricked.

edit: Great post, love it

 

[mmj_uk]

i don't think you understand what peer review is - it's literally just to wheedle out glaring errors, the content is pretty much irrelevant. I mean you read the sun so i don't know how you can complain about drivel getting published.

Read the quote I posted, all of the papers that they submitted were fatally flawed by design and were based on the type of anti-scientific ideology that they had observed in other peer reviewed studies, which they termed "grievance studies".

I just think it's funny that the type of people who go around calling everyone they disagree with Nazi's accepted a study that was lifted out of Adolf Hitler's book which was pretty much the blueprint for Nazism. Maybe there's something in the term Feminazi.

If anyone wants a detailed version of what they did and the subjects of their other even more ridiculous studies this is a good read:
https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/

 

[Irish_Tom]

Two of the three authors were on Joe Rogan (#1191). Worth a watch/listen.

 

[StriderX]

Posting The S*n Articles on this forum should be a bannable offense.

There's even a Times article cited in the text and still The S*n was used, truly humor has come to these isles. Anyway the Journal in question is trash and only perennially offended people give a ****, if it was Nature or something maybe it'd have genuine weight.

Complaining about an area of study which is purposely biased with a peer review network which is purposefully biased and then abusing that fact to make it seem like it's a problem everywhere is disgusting.

 

[Caracus2k]

Didn't we discuss this back in October 2018?

Peer review and pushed papers are only reliable in my view to the extent that they have a testable, repeatable hypothesis behind them.

Too many papers coming out of the 'humanities' are basically little more then biased opinion pieces with 'peer review' consisting of little more then some like minded people reading the paper and concurring with its opionon.

 

[StriderX]

Didn't we discuss this back in October 2018?

Peer review and pushed papers are only reliable in my view to the extent that they have a testable, repeatable hypothesis behind them.

Too many papers coming out of the 'humanities' are basically little more then biased opinion pieces with 'peer review' consisting of little more then some like minded people reading the paper and concurring with its opionon.

Then dont read them? Problem solved, you don't need to froth over it if you dont see it, i'm happily able to go through life without citing or seeing an article from "Gender, Place and Culture".

First time even seeing it is because someone frothed over it.

 

[dowie]

Or rather laughed at it.

They do have a reasonable point to make though, these ideas aren’t just confined to these subjects but they can become a sort of groupthink at universities. They deserve to be mocked.