Fake liberal prof, writes papers for peer review and publication...

3 people wrote fake academic papaers and submitt d for peer review and publication. You can read outlines and responses in the link below.

They study was basically, how if a paper had a social Justice Dog Whistle, it was basically loved. At a publication rate that would have gotton this fake person tenure at their fake university

Some of the papers, include:

Rape culture at dog parks
And
Reworking a chapter of Hitler’s Mein Kampf as a feminist piece


areomagazine.com...

Yeah.

Publish, publish, publish.

Name of the game, anymore.

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Scholarship based less upon finding truth and more upon attending to social grievances has become firmly established, if not fully dominant, within these fields, and their scholars increasingly bully students, administrators, and other departments into adhering to their worldview. This worldview is not scientific, and it is not rigorous.

areomagazine.com...

I was raised in university culture and I was told long ago, "Science has been hijacked by politics".

Another little trick that's sometimes played is to give a lecture consisting of random academic sounding statements strung together with no order. Afterwards the audience are invited to write a summary of their understanding of the lecture. Many of them don't want to admit they understood nothing so they make up a suitable, academic sounding summary.

These aren't fake liberals, these are true leftists making a dire attempt to save the left from themselves - and I wholeheartedly applaud them for it. Helen Pluckrose in particular is a gem. If these brave academics fail in this pursuit then so will our society, so you might want to pay attention.

There are accompanying documentary style videos to this project study on youtube produced by Mike Nayna...Worth checking out for anyone that hasn't already been utterly ruined and is interested in the survival of our society.

That is called academic fraud. A fireable offense and possible jail time


.a reply to: SocratesJohnson

a reply to: lakenheath24

Lol

Liberap arts posing as science is the fraud

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

***Fake Science***

Students signing up for a 4 year course is the fraud. Yet those libby unis have zero problem taking their tuition money for a degree worth $15k a year on the market. Ironic aint it. Thats why lib professors love tenure.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

a reply to: Kester

Another little trick that's sometimes played is to give a lecture consisting of random academic sounding statements strung together with no order. Afterwards the audience are invited to write a summary of their understanding of the lecture. Many of them don't want to admit they understood nothing so they make up a suitable, academic sounding summary.

try doing that with an audience of engineers

I don't really care if anything I read has been peer reviewed. It's been proven to be biased and not worth the glory nor status that people put on it.

If it is false, it will be proven false quickly. No need for this outdated practice anymore...

originally posted by: superman2012
I don't really care if anything I read has been peer reviewed. It's been proven to be biased and not worth the glory nor status that people put on it.

If it is false, it will be proven false quickly. No need for this outdated practice anymore...

I’m confused by your statement...

Isn’t peer review doing just that? Proving or backing what the ediotrs/author has said.

Btw... I work in academic publishing on the publisher side.

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure

originally posted by: superman2012
I don't really care if anything I read has been peer reviewed. It's been proven to be biased and not worth the glory nor status that people put on it.

If it is false, it will be proven false quickly. No need for this outdated practice anymore...

I’m confused by your statement...

Isn’t peer review doing just that? Proving or backing what the ediotrs/author has said.

Btw... I work in academic publishing on the publisher side.

In theory yes, peer review would do just that. Unfortunately, like every other facet of our society, there are people that take shortcuts, don't care, or don't understand. To rely so heavily on such a flawed one stop system, seems crazy to me.

It doesn't work the way it is supposed to, it doesn't do anything more to further scientific knowledge, and it becomes an exclusive "club" that people need to belong to. Of course, most of that is just my opinion, but, there are many examples of papers being submitted that make absolutely no sense, and as long as they pay the fee, it gets accepted and published.

Don't worry though, I'll never endorse a campaign to shut down anything to do with science, no matter how I feel about it.

Edit: By being proven false, I only meant by actual researchers and scientists that try and either succeed or fail, to reproduce the same results using the same techniques. Andrew Wakefield and the false vaccine-autism link published by The Lancet should be more than enough proof of how this is outdated and ineffective.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Or Yorkshire farmers.

a reply to: superman2012

Academic publishing is most certainly incestuous as you basically mention. And for what we do, fees don't mean they get published.

Science publishing is a different animal altogether. People wanting to make a name for themselves and last throughout history in the textbooks. Some it's just revising theories some to just sell more books. Because hwy, it's a business.

How do you feel about double-blind peer review?

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

These aren't fake liberals, these are true leftists making a dire attempt to save the left from themselves - and I wholeheartedly applaud them for it. Helen Pluckrose in particular is a gem. If these brave academics fail in this pursuit then so will our society, so you might want to pay attention.