Mein Kampf passage passes peer review

Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,562
Then dont read them? Problem solved

Not really......

Being someone who thinks that the scientific method is the best way to establish objective truth I value a system where a hypothesis is made that can then be tested againsts repeatable experiments to either prove, disprove or refine the hypothesis.

Such poor academic rigour as shown here affects all of the sciences and the whole premise of peer reviewed work.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Nov 2003
Posts
5,525
Location
Bedfordshire
This happens a lot with medical papers too, bad data is pushed through with biased results and they get their mates in another department to sign it off. No one else bothers to read anything apart from the trial outline and the conclusion, ignoring all the misrepresented data in the middle.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
14,689
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.

The issue the authors discuss on Joe Rogan is something they call ‘Academic Laundering’.

Once these papers are published in ‘peer reviewed journals’ they become part of the accepted body of knowlege and can then be cited by other papers to further validate these ideas.

As the body of ‘evidence’ for these grievance studies grows, the people perpetuating these views become more empowered.

What’s worse is some of the hoax papers that weren’t accepted, or were returned to be revised as part of the peer-review process, because they weren’t extreme enough.

We then see the students of these subjects demonstrating or protesting against perceived injustices because they have been ‘proven’ by such papers.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
25 Jun 2011
Posts
5,468
Location
Yorkshire and proud of it!
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.

Because you care less about those around you and how the next generation is brought up than we do. Students are being taught lies in our universities (subsidised by us, I might add). Government policy and legislation is influenced by the output of such academics. The whole teenage "not caring" attitude, the rest of us grow out of. We live in this society, and to quote Donne, no man is an island.

social-anthropology.png


social-anthropology2.png
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Jul 2004
Posts
7,050
Because you care less about those around you and how the next generation is brought up than we do. Students are being taught lies in our universities (subsidised by us, I might add). Government policy and legislation is influenced by the output of such academics. The whole teenage "not caring" attitude, the rest of us grow out of. We live in this society, and to quote Donne, no man is an island.

social-anthropology.png


social-anthropology2.png
Those pictures are worrying.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
50,384
Location
Plymouth
The problem here is that most people don't understand either the process or purpose of the peer review process.

Peer review does not involve repeating the study or rerunning the experiments. It also doesn't involve challenging internally consistent conclusions (that's the realm of a counter study).
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Mar 2008
Posts
32,747
IIRC, the second one is Sociology class at an American University. Actually spoke with the person who took it and no, there's no excusing context. The first one I just saw posted somewhere. Yep - very worrying. Nor especially atypical these days.

How do you know it's not atypical, got any numbers to show or is just your "feelings"?

I also definitely do not care if some pointless US university is allowing this to be taught, that's their problem not mine, because AMAZINGLY i'm not American, nor do i live there.

Show me a UK university teaching this that has >50% of the university in the class, then i'll care.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,562
"science is a social construct" in a modern classroom with artificial lighting and a projector displaying this nonsense... .


How do you know it's not atypical, got any numbers to show or is just your "feelings"?

I also definitely do not care if some pointless US university is allowing this to be taught, that's their problem not mine, because AMAZINGLY i'm not American, nor do i live there.

Show me a UK university teaching this that has >50% of the university in the class, then i'll care.

StriderX shows they have almost certainly never been educated at a university......

Expecting more than 50% of a university in the class!

How exactly do you think universities work?

And on what planet does any one class have over half the university present (be that at once or at different times!)

If you ever did attend a university it must have been a rather small one with few classes!
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Sep 2018
Posts
12,656
Talk about misleading topic title, the passages did not pass peer review, they were published in a peer review journal.

One is a fault with the editors of the journals. The other is a demonstration of the scientific methodology of peer review working exactly as intended.
The point is that even minor academic journals have a responsibility to curate their content, and it appears some are not doing their job.
Yes and no, it depends on whether the journals editors are qualified in the relevant field as if not their not part of the peer review process their just editors.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
19 May 2004
Posts
31,479
Location
Nordfriesland, Germany
As a scientist, I find it funny how people outside science talk about Peer Review and Peer Reviewed papers. Peer Review is basically the lowest hurdle that something has to pass. It means, really, very little. What matters is how those ideas are then received, cited, developed, and challenged. Huge amounts of garbage is written, peer reviewed, and published every year. Even most good papers contain some dodgy work; and some of the drekk that gets published in top journals like Science and Nature is astonishing.

There's nothing special about the areas that are targeted by these hoaxers, except that they've deliberately set out to deceive, and stopping deception is really, really not what Peer Review is about. The whole process basically assumes that everyone involved is acting in good faith.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2006
Posts
23,346
Quite scary that we have nutters with no idea allowed to lecture students now.

"sociology" was a useless enough degree to begin with.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Sep 2018
Posts
12,656
To be fair they, or at least one of them, are assistant professors of philosophy and that's not something I'd consider to be a science, apologies to anyone not working or studying in the hard sciences. :)
 

Deleted member 66701

D

Deleted member 66701

To be fair they, or at least one of them, are assistant professors of philosophy and that's not something I'd consider to be a science, apologies to anyone not working or studying in the hard sciences. :)

Erm, what?

Philosophy is the root of all science. Without philosophy there would be no science.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,911
Philosophy is the root of all science. Without philosophy there would be no science.

But that isn't the same as claiming philosophy is a science, seems there is disagreement among philosophers on that one.

Not that the issue of whether their particular field of study is or isn't a science is particularly relevant to whether their arguments are sound here.
 
Back
Top Bottom