Author Topic: So are universities just not getting the job done any more?  (Read 583 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D HEY!

your deflection attempt won't hide you from my reply describing (your claimed non-existent) data. Or do you have a rather unique triggered version of data definition, hey?

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Very different subject matter, yes.  One is much more subjective, a lot more susceptible to confirmation bias.
Any field built on results that cannot be tested against real world experiments is subject to confirmation bias because there is no link to reality that makes it possible to disprove nonsensical claims. This means the selection of "right" and "wrong" claims is driven entirely by the preconceptions and biases of the researchers. Climate science is as bad as social science.
Old Old x 1 View List

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
Any field built on results that cannot be tested against real world experiments is subject to confirmation bias because there is no link to reality that makes it possible to disprove nonsensical claims. This means the selection of "right" and "wrong" claims is driven entirely by the preconceptions and biases of the researchers. Climate science is as bad as social science.

shocked your denial self would deny empirical evidence - shocked I tells ya!


Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Any field built on results that cannot be tested against real world experiments is subject to confirmation bias because there is no link to reality that makes it possible to disprove nonsensical claims. This means the selection of "right" and "wrong" claims is driven entirely by the preconceptions and biases of the researchers. Climate science is as bad as social science.

Never mind what ~97% of the scientists who actually know what they are talking about and hide back under your bed.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
shocked your denial self would deny empirical evidence - shocked I tells ya!
Empirical "evidence' is not evidence when it consists of entirely statistical correlation analyses dependent on numerous untestable assumptions. Of course, you have no interest in understanding the limitations of scientific knowledge as long as it makes claims that support your ideological preconceptions.

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
Empirical "evidence' is not evidence when it consists of entirely statistical correlation analyses dependent on numerous untestable assumptions. Of course, you have no interest in understanding the limitations of scientific knowledge as long as it makes claims that support your ideological preconceptions.

still waiting... quite literally for years now - waiting for you to validate your denial by providing your understood/interpreted principal causal link to GW/climate change... that alternative principal causal link other than anthropogenic sourced CO2. Still waiting. Is there a problem, for you?


Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
still waiting... quite literally for years now...
Typical waldo. Refuse to address a point you can't refute by changing the topic.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
your deflection attempt won't hide you from my reply describing (your claimed non-existent) data. Or do you have a rather unique triggered version of data definition, hey?

I think young Poonlight may be suggesting that the absurdity of the topics in question should render the discussion of how to present the "research" a moot point.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
Typical waldo. Refuse to address a point you can't refute by changing the topic.

what's to refute - your unsubstantiated (denier based) opinion - where you make blanket, broad-based, all-encompassing claims without presenting an iota of actual evidence and/or data you presume to be referring to?

per your typical TimG norm, you somehow manage to deflect once again from the oft repeated challenge put to you; here, once again:
Quote
please validate your denial by providing your understood/interpreted principal causal link to GW/climate change... your understood/interpreted alternative principal causal link; one other than anthropogenic sourced CO2

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
I think young Poonlight may be suggesting that the absurdity of the topics in question should render the discussion of how to present the "research" a moot point.

after a year long effort, 7 of 20 papers were accepted for publication... as I understand, only 2 of the 7 related journals would be considered mainstream journals. My earlier point was intended to emphasize that even the most reputable journal can be "hoaxed" when people lie and hide their true intentions - when they break key peer-review tenets like honesty and good faith... when they submit for review bad-faith arguments and/or manufactured data & research.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
after a year long effort, 7 of 20 papers were accepted for publication... as I understand, only 2 of the 7 related journals would be considered mainstream journals. My earlier point was intended to emphasize that even the most reputable journal can be "hoaxed" when people lie and hide their true intentions - when they break key peer-review tenets like honesty and good faith... when they submit for review bad-faith arguments and/or manufactured data & research.

If the system depends on the assumption of honesty, good faith, or competence for that matter, on the part of the would-be researchers... is it still a system?

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9121
If the system depends on the assumption of honesty, good faith, or competence for that matter, on the part of the would-be researchers... is it still a system?

 -k

Not one you can depend on for very much.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
If the system depends on the assumption of honesty, good faith, or competence for that matter, on the part of the would-be researchers... is it still a system?
Not one you can depend on for very much.

no - again, good faith/honesty are tenets of... principles of... peer review. The waldo says: you're confusing tenet/principle with obligation. If you're questioning the peer-review "system, as you say", perhaps familiarize yourselves with other like examples, say like... contract law, where good faith is an organizing principle but not a standalone performance obligation. Hey wilber, can you depend on contract law... much... very much?

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10193
If the system depends on the assumption of honesty, good faith, or competence for that matter, on the part of the would-be researchers... is it still a system?

Waldo does have a point though.  If you make up things in a humanities/social science journal essay, and to a journal reviewer they seem to add up even though they unknowingly aren't real, things can easily slip through a review process, even if the conclusions seem wacky.

The lesson is that even if something is published in a humanities academic journal, it is still a subjective opinion, and so just because an opinion argument is published in an academic journal doesn't mean that opinion is correct.  It's still subject to an "appeal to authority" fallacy.  The bigger lesson here is for students & everyone to think for themselves, and be critical.

Everyone of every ideological stripe has confirmation bias, we want to believe that which confirms our beliefs,  and are much more critical on opinions that oppose it.  We're all players in the great information war that's been going on basically the entirety of human history, and sometimes the best ideas don't win, only the loudest.
"Nipples is one of the great minds of our time!" - Bubbermiley

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9121
Ah but wasn't it you who tried to flog the BS story that foreign students can't speak English and are a detriment to Canadian students?

I don't know if they are a detriment but when my grandson was taking first year engineering, a foreign student in his class was told his English wasn't good enough and was held back for a year while he took English courses.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC