What Would We Do Without Peer Review?

“The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct”

14 Replies to “What Would We Do Without Peer Review?”

A lengthy article about a deep subject.

I’ll pass on reading the article. As I am already swinging one, I don’t need a lengthy explanation into penises, real or imagined. So I never forget what it is, I keep it within arm’s length.

This ought to start some discussions with the I, Napoleon gang.

The paper raises some penetrating questions. It could make a vas deferens to the field of study.

The penis is mightier than the Board!

Pheww, on first reading the title I thought they were going to tell me that there isn’t a monster in my pants?
Then I read that it was a faux piece which the monkeys at peer review had no chance to catch and all is well in the world

And now you know where the intellectualists get their brains from, however, you must admit that the Postmodern Generator is work of a pure genius.

Step 1: identify a respected institution.
Step 2: infiltrate it.
Step 3: kill it.
Step 4: gut it.
Step 5: wear that skin suit.
Step 6: demand respect.
Iowa Hawk. Inaccurately reproduced.

I learned everything I ever needed to know about my Pennis … by watching “Puppetry of the Pennis” those Auzzies really like to fiddle about with themselves. Fiddle about … Fiddle about
http://www.ticketmaster.com/Puppetry-of-the-Penis-tickets/artist/828588#!

The whole field of “gender studies” and other “postmodern” rubbish is reminiscent of the great 18th century fraud, George Psalmanazar, a Frenchman who claimed to be from Formosa, and went so far as to invent a language which missionaries studied with the intention of using to convert the Chinese. Having paid good money for the lessons, it became immediately apparent on arrival in the real island of Formosa that the language was gibberish and utterly worthless. Psalmanazar had his loot and the missionaries were too far removed from the perp to be able to get their money back. So it is with worthless university degrees. By the time the students and their parents wake up to the fact they’ve been swindled the profs have tenure and the next batch of gullible fools is being fed through the mill.

Clever quip.
However, Janey Canuck/Emily Murphy was an eugenicist/Nazi. A person to be despised. I’ve read you comments all over “conservative” blogs and none seem to realize your nic is a Nazi related nic.
Emily Murphy was a very evil person. Evil. She is feted as one of Canada’s first female judges.
She was an evil person who courted and promoted an evil philosophy. A philosophy that Canada eventually reputed and went to war against.

This fiasco shows what happens to the humanities and the social sciences when philosophy, which underlies all other intellectual disciplines, floats off into space (Kant, Hegel, Marx, Gramsci, Marcuse) instead of being grounded in reason and reality (Ayn Rand).

This Hoax Article RECEIVED a once-required & honest appraisal from the Scientific Community. But now The Slyentific Community will endorse ANY PAPER written no Matter How Inane; How Incredibly False IF the Phony Writing says the Magic TWO WORDS – Climate Change.
The perquisite number of baffle words & Bull Sh*t when combined with Climate Change used to Mean Immediate Funding from almost every Corrupt Government Department which naturally TOOK Their Share of Tax-Dollars.
Now that POTUS # 45 said “Stop The Climate Change Crap” the feckless signers of CRAP are less enthusiastic about sticking it to The Tax-payers by Possibly sticking Their Necks Out.

Indeed, what would we do without peer review? What happened was that both referees were too scared to call bull$hit on an obnoxiously progressive paper. They probably realized that the paper is bull$hit (just plain progressive bull$hit not intentional mocking bull$hit) and gave it a pass in order not to be identified as reactionary sexists, misogynist troglodytes. It was probably more their fear than it was ignorance or casual attitude towards their responsibility as referees. Strictly from the point of view of self preservation it was a rational decision to praise that paper.

14 Replies to “What Would We Do Without Peer Review?”

Navigation