Posted on 03/01/2014 6:35:04 AM PST by Malone LaVeigh
Do scientific papers ever seem like unreadable gibberish to you? Well, sometimes they really are.
Some 120 papers published in established scientific journals over the last few years have been found to be frauds, created by nothing more than an automated word generator that puts random, fancy-sounding words together in plausible sentence structures. As a result they have been pulled from the journals that originally published them.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Hey, dummy, do you hear me arguing for more investment in hot fusion?
***Yes, by direct implication. It is the only direct competitor of cold fusion, so by arguing against the noble efforts of cold fusion you argue FOR the multi$Billion fraud of CHF. Jesus called it “straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel”.
If someone were to, say, loudly decry the fallibilities of Ukranians while keeping completely silent about Russians, the implication is crystal clear. Dummy.
Up your meds.
There already is the “Journal of Irreproduceable Results”
A collection of papers with an abstract. That was a scientific publication, no bias, no agenda, just facts as best they knew.
Today's media-muddled minds cannot deal with information presented in that fashion.
ps. I teach Math, Chem and Physics at the high school level.
Up your meds.
***Up yours.
Way to go, professors!
Combined PING! and DANG!
ROTFLMAO!
THANKS!
Good one, accurate too. No, I won't cite any examples.
Oh, I will! In a recent thread about the Romney/Obama race, one of the conservatives who stayed home rather than soil himself by voting for the "lesser of two evils" said that Romney is a liberal, which is true, but that "a vote for a liberal makes you a liberal."
That's like when the anthropologists went to a primitive place and tried to take pictures of tribesmen, but the primitives thought the camera was "stealing their soul."
"Critical theory" navel-gazing at its finest.
Now that's funny!
I held my nose and voted for THE TWO RINOS McNasty, and Romney-0-lite, What did I get, ZERO FOR ANOTHER 4 YRS!
WORD OF WARNING NO MORE VOTES FOR RINOS! NO NATIONAL GOP DONATIONS TO KEEP THEM IN OFFICE EITHER. GOODBYE LAMAR ALEXANDER AND DO LET THE DOOR HIT YOUR BACK SIDE ON THE WAY OUT, I AM SICK OF YOU MUGGING OUR MILITARY AND TENNESSEE! WHILE MAKING YOUR SELF VERY, VERY RICH.
The conceptual-generative individual may reiterate the empirical evidence of teleological metapraxis...
(translation: You can say that again!)
It's true in publishing as a whole. News sources used to have subject matter experts and editors, who paid attention to content and its meaning. Now, some geek just runs content through spellcheck and hits "send".
Do take your prozac.
Ah, I see you’ve read Habermas.
LOL! Adorno’s sweetheart.
I've got Habermas' "Discourses on Modernity." And let me tell you, if you ever have insomnia, I have the cure.
I prefer Tetris... thanks, anyway!
As nonsensical as the writings of Habermas are, the writings of Joseph Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI are quite clear and articulate. There is a book that is a summation of a discussion/debate the two had.
The Dialectics of Secularization: On Reason and Religion
"Two of the worlds great contemporary thinkers--theologian and churchman Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, and Jurgen Habermas, philosopher and Neo-Marxist social critic--discuss and debate aspects of secularization, and the role of reason and religion in a free society. These insightful essays are the result of a remarkable dialogue between the two men, sponsored by the Catholic Academy of Bavaria, a little over a year before Joseph Ratzinger was elected pope.Jurgen Habermas has surprised many observers with his call for "the secular society to acquire a new understanding of religious convictions", as Florian Schuller, director of the Catholic Academy of Bavaria, describes it his foreword. Habermas discusses whether secular reason provides sufficient grounds for a democratic constitutional state. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI argues for the necessity of certain moral principles for maintaining a free state, and for the importance of genuine reason and authentic religion, rather than what he calls "pathologies of reason and religion", in order to uphold the states moral foundations. Both men insist that proponents of secular reason and religious conviction should learn from each other, even as they differ over the particular ways that mutual learning should occur."
As dense as Habermas is, I will give him credit for his “post-post-modernism,” which recognizes that a philosophy that eschews all other philosopies is itself a philosophy, and that in a real world, no civilization can survive without some kind of moral framework, from wherever derived.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.