2 ms·
Wow! They're literally submitting references to papers by Firstname Lastname, John Doe and Jane Smith and nobody is noticing or punishing them.
by direwolf20 10mo ago
Wow! They're literally submitting references to papers by Firstname Lastname, John Doe and Jane Smith and nobody is noticing or punishing them.
- emil-lp 10mo agoThey might (I hope) still be punished after discovery.
- an0malous 10mo agoIt’s the way of the future
- heliumtera 10mo ago[flagged]
- azan_ 10mo agoYes, it only led to all advancements in the history of humanity, what a joke!
- heliumtera 10mo agoI am sure all advancements in the history of humanity was properly peer reviewed! Including coca cola and Linux!
- azan_ 10mo agoIf you wanted to attack peer review you should've attacked peer review, not entire science. And if "muh science" was some kind of code for peer review then it's not my fault that you are awful at articulating your point. It's still not clear what the hell do you mean.
- heliumtera 10mo agoScience funding is strictly tied to publication on "respected journals" which is strictly tied to this gatekeeping horrendous process. I won't deny I am terrible at articulating my point, but I will maintain it. We can undeniably say that science, scientific institutions, scientific periodic journals, funding and any other financial instrument constructed to promote scientific advancements is rotten by design and should be abandoned immediately. This joke serves no good. "But what about muh scientific method?" Yeah yeah yeah, whoever thinks modern science honors logic and reason is part of the problem and has being played, and forever will be
- Sharlin 10mo ago[flagged]
- sigbottle 10mo agoI'm a feyerabend sympathizer, but even he wouldn't have gone this far. He was against establishment dogma, not pro-anti intellectualism.
- biophysboy 10mo ago[flagged]
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- thaw13579 10mo agoTo be honest, this one could just as well be a sloppy bibliography.