The author screwed up by admitting it was a farce. He could have cashed out by starting a movement that "cured" homophobia via receptive penetrative sex toy therapy. The MSM would have run wild with it. Guys would be standing around the water cooler bragging about the size of their sex toys.

Now that would be a conspiracy- it was a team of three authors! Funny comment.

Genuis. Tavistock could use people like you.

Oh believe me, there are people out there who are starting to subvert the weaknesses of P.C. culture and it's going to crash and burn the whole thing

I'm an atheist and praying for that.

Tavistock probably is using people like him.

And this is how transgenderism was created.

I really hate to mess up their stats, but I tried that a couple times, and found it rather distracting and unpleasant – and I have lifelong friends who are gay.

What I mean to say, is I hope these people sharpen their own toys and go fuck themselves.

Isn't there a g-spot for men in their backdoor?

It's called the P-spot.

In some fields, this is more true than in others.

Theoretical physics and maths as an example.

In what world does math require no knowledge of the subject to prove something. Literally the only way to make progress in math is logically prove new theories using the mathematical system.

Academia now verges on being a sort of church of subversion: of logic and societal norms. Academia is intended to serve as a an intellectual rudder to society so it may be that the effort to promote idiocy in academia is intended to undermine society's ability to resist control by the ruling class.

The majority of academia has always been batshit, you just happen to be living right now so you see all the crazy shit. Only the good ideas survived from the past and the bad ones were forgotten.

At the very least, the bad ideas are leaking out of academia a lot more than they used to. Seeing the kind of weird ideological fare that used to be confined to college newspapers now in mainstream newspapers is very alarming.

Really debating whether to publish the physiological and mental benefits of cuckolding.

The big takeaway from this when money is involved, nothing is sacred and everything becomes more corrupted.

The left political opinions.

This is only true in some fields. The vast majority of scientific fields you are going to run into some real resistant asserting things without proof. Because .... That is the opposite of science

asserting things without proof.

didn't hurt NIST or Bushco.

They have actual data to back up their analysis. You have... youtube videos and your own "common sense".

Well in most colleges, most protests and most social media sites for sure.

No, it wasn't made up farce, it was a series of statements that were considered philosophically and ideologically and in general creatively coherent by the reviewers, for which the academics in question wrote with this very purpose in mind, knowing how they thought and what sort of content they liked.

If we're going to talk about bad science shall we discuss you extrapolating to the whole of academia based on a single error by a non-major journal in the social sciences?

This is part of a pattern at work to delegitimize the concept of science and and the notion of facts.

​

Which is the basic postmodernist and feminist idea, there is no real truth, we make truth based on how we define language.

It's the favored tactic of anyone out to make their ignorance stand equal with others' knowledge.

It's more commonly a tactic used by Strongman Dictatorships to strengthen their power; if you erode trust in experts, the people will have to turn to someone strong to decide for them.

Very true.

​

Wrong.

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/why-some-scientists-say-physics-has-gone-rails-ncna879346 - Physics is no longer about discovery, it's about equations that may or may not fit anywhere within reality. "If you don't understand it, too bad! We're the only ones that need to."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/health/jose-baselga-cancer-memorial-sloan-kettering.html - This guy got caught. Happens all the time.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/13/scientific-publishing-rip-off-taxpayers-fund-research

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535 - Goes against the establishment's idea that vaccines are safe and don't cause autism.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/editor-in-chief-of-worlds-best-known-medical-journal-half-of-all-the-literature-is-false/5451305 - "Science has taken a turn towards darkness."

Did you actually write that from scratch or is it just a collection of links you hold onto. It doesn't really relate to my point or to OPs original point.

For the sake of clarity. OP says "[to be a modern academic] you don't need to know anything or prove anything - you simply need to have the right political opinions".

I counter that this is an absurdly overblown response to the actual detail provided by his source. Extrapolating from some poor reviewer behaviours to saying no-one in academia is required to know anything does not follow.

You then reply with some... stuff... that ranges from kinda, sorta, in a way, maybe related to completely unrelated.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/editor-in-chief-of-worlds-best-known-medical-journal-half-of-all-the-literature-is-false/5451305 - "Science has taken a turn towards darkness."

This comes from an op-ed by the editor in chief of The Lancet, Dr Richard Horton. He is talking about a well known issue with scientific publishing, namely poor sample sizes and unreplicable data. This doesn't relate to OP's original point claiming that academics just need correct political opinions but it is something concerning for those of us in academia and something that people are trying to work on. Dr Horton actually ends his op-ed by outlining the efforts that are already being made to counter these issues:

One of the most convincing proposals came from outside the biomedical community. Tony Weidberg is a Professor of Particle Physics at Oxford. Following several high-profile errors, the particle physics community now invests great effort into intensive checking and rechecking of data prior to publication. By filtering results through independent working groups, physicists are encouraged to criticise. Good criticism is rewarded. The goal is a reliable result, and the incentives for scientists are aligned around this goal.

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/why-some-scientists-say-physics-has-gone-rails-ncna879346 - Physics is no longer about discovery, it's about equations that may or may not fit anywhere within reality. "If you don't understand it, too bad! We're the only ones that need to."

Again, nothing to do with OP's point. This is a discussion that has been going on in Physics for decades about the validity of newer theoretical ideas and whether they can be proven or not.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/health/jose-baselga-cancer-memorial-sloan-kettering.html - This guy got caught. Happens all the time.

Yep, sadly unethical scientists do fail to disclose ties and research fraud does occur. Again, doesn't actually relate to OP's original point or mine.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/13/scientific-publishing-rip-off-taxpayers-fund-research

Yep, this is why the massive drive in academia across the board is towards open access publishing. More and more grant awarding bodies are making it a requirement of their grants that all data is released and all papers are open access. However, and I'm getting bored saying this, it has nothing to do with OP's point or mine.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535 - Goes against the establishment's idea that vaccines are safe and don't cause autism.

Is this just one of your pet conspiracies? It doesn't relate to OP and it's an embarrassingly shit paper written by an economist and not a scientist. Looking through her methods she falsely combines school children with speech and language issues in with autism to bump her numbers. She's not even using medical records either, she takes the levels of autism from school records indicating children who have been put on special lesson plans. Ironically this paper is part of the issue Dr Horton is discussing in your first source.

https://www.schwartzreport.net/fluoride-officially-classified-as-a-neurotoxin-in-worlds-most-prestigious-medical-journa/ - Mainstream/academic science has always said fluoride was safe.

I'm tired of saying 'this doesn't relate to OP's point.

The best thing about being a modern academic is that you don’t have to know anything or prove anything

Where in any of what you have copy pasted do you show that people are getting by in academia on just their political opinions?

You actually post several links demonstrating people being published or holding senior positions who hold controversial opinions.

Poor response

Oh the irony.

Medicine is a form of engineering, not science. Engineering solves practical problems by means of trial and error, science seeks knowledge of ideas and their definitions. How did people breed animals and plants long before Darwin? Or built houses before they knew about gravity? Trial and error - engineering.

Impressive strawmanning. OP is addressing a chink in the armor and your pretending he's trying to outlaw armor.

SMH. The state of reddit: who can argue the best!?

Nowhere in your statement does it actually address an extremely disturbing fact. If you read the article you'll note it mentions that the authors are very left leaning and have done this many times. Including books about a secret gang rape cultures amongst dogs at dog parks...

But let's try to denigrate OP in the spirit of white knighting for social sciences!

Read the article, look into the issue. Don't be such a sheep.

Dude addressed OPs title. Maybe OP shouldnt make such broad generalized titles ?

Impressive strawmanning. OP is addressing a chink in the armor and your pretending he's trying to outlaw armor.

OP actually points out a chink in the armour but titles post "ARMOUR OFFERS NO PROTECTION".

And they represent all academics, how?

“One aspect I thought about was the extent to which metasexual violence, and non- consensual masturbation specifically, introduces uncertainty into all relationships. It is not possible for women to know if a man has masturbated while thinking about them, and I think it might be possible to get theoretical leverage out of this “unknowable” aspect of metasexual violence.” -Reviewer 1, Sociological Theory

holy shit I can't even imagine someone giving such a review with a straight face like yeah, that looks legit.

That's always been true in the "soft sciences". You have to understand that 80% of university programs are in flaky disciplines designed to get rich kids jobs rather than to actually advance our understanding.

yes, three years of partying away from parents, a piece of paper in some soft sunject maybe a MBA ontop, then off to work for a corporation, govt or a NGO.

The problem is that if everything you've been taught is garbage than you're stupider than when you went in, and completely sure that you're the enlightened elite.

Well if you haven’t tried butt stuff, then how can you refute it? 🤔

For example the Harvard Professor claiming coconut oil is like eating poison.

Further evidence that the left has completely lost their sense of humor and their minds.

When everything demands to be taken seriously, nothing can be taken seriously.

Nobody mentioning the "banned" Ted talk of Rupert Sheldrake here yet? I think you will find his perspective on science interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg

Sort of like your statement here.

Yes, that's why I said that.

The best thing about being a modern conspiracy theorist is that you don't have to know anything to prove anything - you just have to have the right political opinions.

I might be missing where the conspiracy is here, but it’s still absolutely hilarious

is the principle and gullibility of targets. what works for a joke also works on people when money or power is involved.

ADE651 for example.

33 years as a university professor. Retired last May.

It's worse than you can imagine. I was the lone, out conservative among the faculty. There were others but they kept quiet

I was attacked by African Americas who demanded my firing. I was attacked by feminists who demanded my firing.

I won each battle but I understand why young conservatives would want to fly under the radar. No tenure no protection.

Any speculation why you were attacked?

The first large scale attack came during the Trevon Martin case. A day after the story hit the media the university decided to sanction a March For Trevon. In an email I sent to everyone at the university I questioned if this was wise since we didn't know what all the facts were.

Within 24 hrs African-American staff and faculty were in the Presidents office demanding I be fired. When that didn't happen they refused to attend any meeting or gathering that I attended. So I would walk into a faculty meeting and all the black faculty would stand and leave. It took several years for this to blow over.

The other major attack came when I hired a male (I was dept chair) to teach a womans studies course in our department. I pointed out that I had a female teaching a similar male topic course. That made no difference. Petitions were circulated, Title IV grievances were filed. Again I prevailed but I was persona non grata among female faculty.

Finally, on election day in 2016 I wore a Hillary For Prison tee shirt on campus and in class .

Yup that was a fun :)

So an unarmed african american teen was murdered by an armed white man just a few yards from his home and you took the position that the school should deny students the right to march based on what? Why did you care at all? Who cares if students march? What "facts" did you want to wait for before it would be OK in your mind for students to march?

Id like to see the email cause Im guessing you're leaving out some very important details here.

Seems like you enjoyed antagonizing minorities and women and did things deliberately to cause problems. Thats why they hated you.

Yeah, that kinda sounds like you were antagonizing people.

Attacked for what? Im what way?

And OP just responds "Woah..." with no further explanation needed. He will probably use this guy's ancedote to further his own spiral into madness.

I just posted an explanation. Give it a read.

Older liberals were fine with my presence on the faculty. They respected free speech and opposing opinions. The younger faculty and staff were a different breed. Intolerant and hostile.

Here is a video explaining how and why these articles were published.

It is pathetic that the academic community needs to prepare themselves for the wave of right-wing charlatans doing stupid shit like this.

Reaching out to the less fortunate makes people feel good. Look at the isis supporters who went there and got got.

Ok, so he gets to be a lit major instead XD

So much effort on this sub to discredit smart people. 'Hey look guys, I found one example of what I see as academic dishonesty by a certain group of people! Thus none of us should ever trust anyone with a college degree and all academia is run by them!'

Too many people on this sub pride themselves on not trusting experts. I think it's because it gives them a sense of identity. Some people are so wrapped up in their own theories and ideas about the world they become insecure at the idea there are others out there that just know more than they do about certain subjects. So they go through all these mental gymnastics to convince themselves they are just as smart as the academics.

We aren't talking about smart people. We're talking about participation award recipients. An IQ test will tell if someone is smart.

College degrees are participation prizes any more. There's a reason why so many supposedly scientific papers cannot be reproduced (ie are fraudulent). And this sort of paper are just glorified (repellent) opinion pieces anyway.

Third wave feminism isn't science, it's just gussied up misandry.

Universities don't produce intelligent people. They were never intended to produce intelligent people. They were supposed to take intelligent people and give them knowledge they might not otherwise get.

Today they are just a bunch of Wizard of Ozzes, passing out diplomas to scarecrows without brains.

They should at least ensure that the failure of high school to produce literate and numerate people is rectified. However they do not, they simply lower standards even more.

You shouldn't need to go to college to learn to read, write and do basic math. But today not even college does that for far too many victims of academia.

Academia as it exists is an obsolete cancer on society. Anyone with enough intelligence to learn can learn everything any university might ever teach and much more online.

It's expensive and not only useless, wastes peoples' lives and produces impoverishment and debt. Corporate employers are learning the hard way the actual mettle of recent 'graduates'.

Degrees are increasingly apprehended accurately as a judge of competency, which is bad news for graduates. "Hmm, a MA in gender studies.. yeah we don't need that headache."

Academia is just as useful and enlightening as the mainstream media.

The irony of complaining how academia is useless while using technology created by academia to do so.

Armies of University graduates is what keeps the modern world functioning, and that system has worked so marvelously well that people like you believe they don't need them. Good luck the next time you need surgery or a faster car, or any of the other millions of technologies made possible by University-trained experts

Oh please. Academia doesn't produce technology. It retards technology.

Imagine how much could be done with those resources if we didn't have these huge extremely expensive cancerous growths all over the landscape sucking up all the resources.

If you then think directed technology research is needed, then do that. You don't need lunkheads wasting four years of their lives chasing a useless degree and all the money they waste doing that.

We waste a ton of money ruining hapless kids' live with debt.

Lmao, it's amazing how you can both not know anything and be so confident about it.

You are a fine exemplar of the problem I am talking about.

Complete incapacity to rationally address a subject. It would seem if I am so wrong you could easily explain that. Yet you cast slurs.

It's all most people know.

Insults as argumentation.

The dumbing down of America is proceeding wonderfully.

Wow. Just wow. That's quite a rant you just did on how higher education is completely useless and is as you call it a 'cancer on society'.

You're just going to completely ignore all the amazing advances in science and technology that allow you to have one of the highest qualities of life in all of our species history. You would be dead in a million ways if it weren't people educated in universities that fulfill important roles in society. Would you let someone without a college degree operate on you if you needed an operation to save your life? Maybe someone who learned how to perform surgery online as you suggest. It's people with college degrees that have the understanding to develop vaccines and antibiotics so our population isn't wiped out from the next flu virus.

It's far worse than useless. It wastes years of peoples' lives and in many cases loads them with debt.

Advances are produced by smart people, not people with participation awards.

Everything a university is supposed to do could be done vastly cheaper with online education.

A degree should tell the world that you have learned something and can complete long term goals.

Modern university doesn't do that. They dumb down curricula and dumb down entrance tests. They teach many things that have nothing to do with advancing science or technology.

An online education system can vet people who meet objective standards, and do it far cheaper.

Why in the world do you need to move and spend years in a dinosaur institution that just wants your money and to give you a participation slip?

People that want to learn will learn. Shipping them off to an institution that values warm bodies because money doesn't have any incentive for people to learn. They just want the cash and to give 'certification' of something that happens decreasingly in actuality, education.

There are around 5000 universities across the US and many more across the globe. You can't just paint them all with the same brush. They produce engineers, doctors, architects, mathematicians, computer scientists, people who our society relies on to function.

I'll ask you again, would you let someone perform surgery on you that doesn't have a college degree?

In fields where they actually impart some expertise, which are not the majority of graduates, I would trust them more if they had a certification that was objective and further didn't artificially limit admissions.

Education of health care providers is an interesting case in its' own right. It's entirely screwed up for multiple reasons, all of which are intentionally caused and needn't exist.

What you want in a health care provider is pretty much what you want from anyone you employ. Expertise. Expertise comes from intelligence plus interest.

This was long ago replaced with a gut test (residency) for many reasons.

But the bottom line with physicians is they can't legally practice without a degree, and the number of degrees are artificially limited via the AAMC.

Then graduates are tossed into a barbaric and rigged but supposedly random 'match' system which prevents physicians interested in a specialty from going to where they would do best. Of course well connected physicians children almost always 'happen' to get the juicy specialties.

Then you sleep deprive these kids for a couple of years and pronounce them competent.

This is a wonderful example of how not to produce good doctors.

Add to this of course they have to have lower standards for protected privileged groups. So you can always assume any minority physician will be inferior even by the low standards of the system.

What you want is a system that lets anyone in that is willing to try, and which system has entirely objective standards. So again an online system would be preferable and massively cheaper. When it came to actual surgery practice that can be done, and is done, at any hospital willing to participate.

Medical education more than any other area of education needs reform desperately and pretty much needs to be tossed in the dumpster and done over.

For surgery you want someone who will save you. A degree is supposed to be an indicator of that. It's sadly not, as we see hundreds of thousands of deaths due to medical error.

So again, a degree doesn't mean competency. It's come to replace competency, and that is the problem.

You know so much less about the world than you think you do man. It's seems that you have this superiority complex because everything you say is in this absolute manner, and your view of the world is binary and separated into extremes. Sure there are definitely problems with our education system but it's not this insidious plot by 'them' to control people's minds or whatever you're suggesting. You just make no effort at all to appreciate the nuances of the education system or see it's current efficacy. There's no self reflection, no consideration of any other perspective other than your own narrow one-dimensional way of looking at things. It's incredible how quickly and casually you dismiss all academia with a wave of your hand and say we need to 'throw it all in the dumpster'.

At this point I see it's not worth it to get you to see reason, but I have to say your 'let's do everything online' education strategy is straight up just not a good idea. There is something to be said about human interaction, there's something you get out of gathering together physically with other humans to exchange ideas and knowledge that is important. You need to be able to practice and apply the things you're learning in the real world. Online school is good for lower-skill stuff like data entry or high school math but you simply can't apply online school to some college-level classes. How would you do your labs if you're taking a science class? How would you get field experience for classes? There are some classes that would be impossible to do online, like public speaking. The fact you think we can dismantle all of current academia and replace it all with an online class is laughable and just goes to show how little critical thought you've put into your rantings.

sauce on the header , anybody ?

Actually I was not opposed to students marching and voicing their opinions. I was opposed to the institution sponsoring the event.

The majority of academia has always been batshit, you just happen to be living right now so you see all the crazy shit. Only the good ideas survived from the past and the bad ones were forgotten.

Did you actually write that from scratch or is it just a collection of links you hold onto. It doesn't really relate to my point or to OPs original point.

For the sake of clarity. OP says "[to be a modern academic] you don't need to know anything or prove anything - you simply need to have the right political opinions".

I counter that this is an absurdly overblown response to the actual detail provided by his source. Extrapolating from some poor reviewer behaviours to saying no-one in academia is required to know anything does not follow.

You then reply with some... stuff... that ranges from kinda, sorta, in a way, maybe related to completely unrelated.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/editor-in-chief-of-worlds-best-known-medical-journal-half-of-all-the-literature-is-false/5451305 - "Science has taken a turn towards darkness."

This comes from an op-ed by the editor in chief of The Lancet, Dr Richard Horton. He is talking about a well known issue with scientific publishing, namely poor sample sizes and unreplicable data. This doesn't relate to OP's original point claiming that academics just need correct political opinions but it is something concerning for those of us in academia and something that people are trying to work on. Dr Horton actually ends his op-ed by outlining the efforts that are already being made to counter these issues:

One of the most convincing proposals came from outside the biomedical community. Tony Weidberg is a Professor of Particle Physics at Oxford. Following several high-profile errors, the particle physics community now invests great effort into intensive checking and rechecking of data prior to publication. By filtering results through independent working groups, physicists are encouraged to criticise. Good criticism is rewarded. The goal is a reliable result, and the incentives for scientists are aligned around this goal.

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/why-some-scientists-say-physics-has-gone-rails-ncna879346 - Physics is no longer about discovery, it's about equations that may or may not fit anywhere within reality. "If you don't understand it, too bad! We're the only ones that need to."

Again, nothing to do with OP's point. This is a discussion that has been going on in Physics for decades about the validity of newer theoretical ideas and whether they can be proven or not.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/health/jose-baselga-cancer-memorial-sloan-kettering.html - This guy got caught. Happens all the time.

Yep, sadly unethical scientists do fail to disclose ties and research fraud does occur. Again, doesn't actually relate to OP's original point or mine.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/13/scientific-publishing-rip-off-taxpayers-fund-research

Yep, this is why the massive drive in academia across the board is towards open access publishing. More and more grant awarding bodies are making it a requirement of their grants that all data is released and all papers are open access. However, and I'm getting bored saying this, it has nothing to do with OP's point or mine.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535 - Goes against the establishment's idea that vaccines are safe and don't cause autism.

Is this just one of your pet conspiracies? It doesn't relate to OP and it's an embarrassingly shit paper written by an economist and not a scientist. Looking through her methods she falsely combines school children with speech and language issues in with autism to bump her numbers. She's not even using medical records either, she takes the levels of autism from school records indicating children who have been put on special lesson plans. Ironically this paper is part of the issue Dr Horton is discussing in your first source.

https://www.schwartzreport.net/fluoride-officially-classified-as-a-neurotoxin-in-worlds-most-prestigious-medical-journa/ - Mainstream/academic science has always said fluoride was safe.

I'm tired of saying 'this doesn't relate to OP's point.

Medicine is a form of engineering, not science. Engineering solves practical problems by means of trial and error, science seeks knowledge of ideas and their definitions. How did people breed animals and plants long before Darwin? Or built houses before they knew about gravity? Trial and error - engineering.

The best thing about being a modern conspiracy theorist is that you don't have to know anything to prove anything - you just have to have the right political opinions.

Lmao, it's amazing how you can both not know anything and be so confident about it.