So....you love to post how some scientist, or professor, found something you can use
against the other side?
1. Longfellow wrote this....
"Tell me not, in mournful numbers,
Life is but an empty dream!
For the soul is dead that slumbers,
And things are not what they seem"
Specifically, in the titles that folks see, and give special deference to.
Titles such as professor, or doctor, of scientist.....or religious leader
A recent poster referred to 'impartial academics.' Hardly.
1. Professor Diederik Stapel of Tilburg University, dean of the universitys School of Social and Behavioral Sciences. " Stapel was an academic star in the Netherlands and abroad, the author of several well-regarded studies on human attitudes and behavior. That spring, he published a widely publicized study in Science about an experiment done at the Utrecht train station showing that a trash-filled environment tended to bring out racist tendencies in individuals. And just days earlier, he received more media attention for a study indicating that eating meat made people selfish and less social."
2. " [The former was a] study linking racism to environmental untidiness, supposedly conducted during a strike by sanitation workers. In the experiment described in the Science paper, white volunteers were invited to fill out a questionnaire in a seat among a row of six chairs; the row was empty except for the first chair, which was taken by a black occupant or a white one. Stapel and his co-author claimed that white volunteers tended to sit farther away from the black person when the surrounding area was strewn with garbage.
a. He made everything up. All of it. " Overnight, Stapel went from being a respected professor to perhaps the biggest con man in academic science..... Stapels fraud may shine a spotlight on dishonesty in science, but scientific fraud is hardly new. The rogues gallery of academic liars and cheats features scientific celebrities who have enjoyed similar prominence.
The once-celebrated South Korean stem-cell researcher Hwang Woo Suk stunned scientists in his field a few years ago after it was discovered that almost all of the work for which he was known was fraudulent. The prominent Harvard evolutionary biologist Marc Hauser resigned in 2011 during an investigation by the Office of Research Integrity at the Department of Health and Human Services that would end up determining that some of his papers contained fabricated data."
b." Every year, the Office of Research Integrity uncovers numerous instances¬ of bad behavior by scientists, ranging from lying on grant applications to using fake images in publications. A blog called Retraction Watch publishes a steady stream of posts about papers being retracted by journals because of allegations or evidence of misconduct." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/m...cious-academic-fraud.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
How about another:
3. "Seduction of the Innocent" is a book by German-American psychiatrist Fredric Wertham, published in 1954, that warned that comic books were a negative form of popular literature and a serious cause of juvenile delinquency. The book was a minor bestseller that created alarm in parents and galvanized them to campaign for censorship. At the same time, a U.S. Congressional inquiry was launched into the comic book industry. Subsequent to the publication of "Seduction of the Innocent," the Comics Code Authority was voluntarily established by publishers to self-censor their titles."
Seduction of the Innocent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
a. "Wertham manipulated, falsified, overstated, and created evidence in support of the contentions expressed in "Seduction of the Innocent."
Carol L. Tilley. (2012). Seducing the Innocent: Fredric Wertham and the Falsifications that Helped Condemn Comics. Information & Culture: A Journal of History. 47 (4), 383 - 413.
And, one of my favorites:
4. "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture" is a discredited 2000 book by Michael A. Bellesiles on American gun culture. The book is an expansion of a 1996 Journal of American History article by Bellesiles, and argues that guns were uncommon during peacetime in early United States, and that a culture of gun ownership arose only much later. It initially won the prestigious Bancroft Prize, but later became the first book in that prize's history to have its award rescinded. The revocation occurred afterColumbia University's Board of Trustees decided that Bellesiles had "violated basic norms of scholarship and the high standards expected of Bancroft Prize winners." Arming America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It was designed to strengthen the argument for gun control. He made everything up.
5. Many will recognize a running joke on the board, that 'only 6% of scientists are Republican...or conservatives.' I don't know if that is true...but if it is, it appears that it is a good thing.
Notice that the bogus studies are designed to advance Liberal themes. Perhaps that is because universities are overwhelmingly Liberal...and these themes herald career advancement.
a. And this is not just recently. The wave of vilification of bourgeois culture received impetus from The Authoritarian Personality, by Adorno, et. al., 1950, which identified antidemocratic indicia such as obedience and respect for authority. Conservatism, of course, was another name for fascism, and represented personal pathology.
So....let's remember: no matter what precedes their names, , the overriding title is Homo sapiens. And that means that the same attitude and motivation inspires all of us.
So....still ready to accept all those anti-religion, anti-conservative, anti-American theses that come from 'impartial academics'?
against the other side?
1. Longfellow wrote this....
"Tell me not, in mournful numbers,
Life is but an empty dream!
For the soul is dead that slumbers,
And things are not what they seem"
Specifically, in the titles that folks see, and give special deference to.
Titles such as professor, or doctor, of scientist.....or religious leader
A recent poster referred to 'impartial academics.' Hardly.
1. Professor Diederik Stapel of Tilburg University, dean of the universitys School of Social and Behavioral Sciences. " Stapel was an academic star in the Netherlands and abroad, the author of several well-regarded studies on human attitudes and behavior. That spring, he published a widely publicized study in Science about an experiment done at the Utrecht train station showing that a trash-filled environment tended to bring out racist tendencies in individuals. And just days earlier, he received more media attention for a study indicating that eating meat made people selfish and less social."
2. " [The former was a] study linking racism to environmental untidiness, supposedly conducted during a strike by sanitation workers. In the experiment described in the Science paper, white volunteers were invited to fill out a questionnaire in a seat among a row of six chairs; the row was empty except for the first chair, which was taken by a black occupant or a white one. Stapel and his co-author claimed that white volunteers tended to sit farther away from the black person when the surrounding area was strewn with garbage.
a. He made everything up. All of it. " Overnight, Stapel went from being a respected professor to perhaps the biggest con man in academic science..... Stapels fraud may shine a spotlight on dishonesty in science, but scientific fraud is hardly new. The rogues gallery of academic liars and cheats features scientific celebrities who have enjoyed similar prominence.
The once-celebrated South Korean stem-cell researcher Hwang Woo Suk stunned scientists in his field a few years ago after it was discovered that almost all of the work for which he was known was fraudulent. The prominent Harvard evolutionary biologist Marc Hauser resigned in 2011 during an investigation by the Office of Research Integrity at the Department of Health and Human Services that would end up determining that some of his papers contained fabricated data."
b." Every year, the Office of Research Integrity uncovers numerous instances¬ of bad behavior by scientists, ranging from lying on grant applications to using fake images in publications. A blog called Retraction Watch publishes a steady stream of posts about papers being retracted by journals because of allegations or evidence of misconduct." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/m...cious-academic-fraud.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
How about another:
3. "Seduction of the Innocent" is a book by German-American psychiatrist Fredric Wertham, published in 1954, that warned that comic books were a negative form of popular literature and a serious cause of juvenile delinquency. The book was a minor bestseller that created alarm in parents and galvanized them to campaign for censorship. At the same time, a U.S. Congressional inquiry was launched into the comic book industry. Subsequent to the publication of "Seduction of the Innocent," the Comics Code Authority was voluntarily established by publishers to self-censor their titles."
Seduction of the Innocent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
a. "Wertham manipulated, falsified, overstated, and created evidence in support of the contentions expressed in "Seduction of the Innocent."
Carol L. Tilley. (2012). Seducing the Innocent: Fredric Wertham and the Falsifications that Helped Condemn Comics. Information & Culture: A Journal of History. 47 (4), 383 - 413.
And, one of my favorites:
4. "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture" is a discredited 2000 book by Michael A. Bellesiles on American gun culture. The book is an expansion of a 1996 Journal of American History article by Bellesiles, and argues that guns were uncommon during peacetime in early United States, and that a culture of gun ownership arose only much later. It initially won the prestigious Bancroft Prize, but later became the first book in that prize's history to have its award rescinded. The revocation occurred afterColumbia University's Board of Trustees decided that Bellesiles had "violated basic norms of scholarship and the high standards expected of Bancroft Prize winners." Arming America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It was designed to strengthen the argument for gun control. He made everything up.
5. Many will recognize a running joke on the board, that 'only 6% of scientists are Republican...or conservatives.' I don't know if that is true...but if it is, it appears that it is a good thing.
Notice that the bogus studies are designed to advance Liberal themes. Perhaps that is because universities are overwhelmingly Liberal...and these themes herald career advancement.
a. And this is not just recently. The wave of vilification of bourgeois culture received impetus from The Authoritarian Personality, by Adorno, et. al., 1950, which identified antidemocratic indicia such as obedience and respect for authority. Conservatism, of course, was another name for fascism, and represented personal pathology.
So....let's remember: no matter what precedes their names, , the overriding title is Homo sapiens. And that means that the same attitude and motivation inspires all of us.
So....still ready to accept all those anti-religion, anti-conservative, anti-American theses that come from 'impartial academics'?
