XPost: sci.physics.relativity

The Band of Debunkers Busting Bad Scientists...

Go to first: https://www.drudgereport.com/

then click the headline

The Band of Debunkers Busting Bad Scientists...

dat will pass the patwall of WSJ article.

Those of yous that already
have the knowhow:

https://www.wsj.com/science/data-colada-debunk-stanford-president-research-14664f3?mod=hp_lead_pos8







--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

The Starmaker wrote:

The Band of Debunkers Busting Bad Scientists...

Go to first: https://www.drudgereport.com/

then click the headline

The Band of Debunkers Busting Bad Scientists...

dat will pass the paywall of WSJ article.

Those of yous that already
have the knowhow:

https://www.wsj.com/science/data-colada-debunk-stanford-president-research-14664f3?mod=hp_lead_pos8

Here are a few excepts:

https://retractionwatch.com/2022/12/27/nearing-5000-retractions-a-review-of-2022/

https://datacolada.org/

https://datacolada.org/109

https://pubpeer.com/

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-25331-001

Retraction Watch, which with research organization
Crossref keep a log of some 50,000 papers discredited over the past
century,
https://retractionwatch.com/ https://www.crossref.org/images/blog/2023/sample-record-retraction-watch-border.png




“If you take the sleuths out of the equation,” Oransky said, “it’s very difficult to see how most of these retractions would have happened.”

"Bad data goes undetected in academic journals largely because the
publications rely on volunteer experts to ensure the quality of
published work, not to detect fraud. Journals don’t have the expertise
or personnel to examine underlying data for errors or
deliberate manipulation, said Holden Thorp, editor in chief of the
Science family of journals."

"Bik and others said it can take months or years for journals to resolve complaints about suspect studies. Of nearly 800 papers that
Bik reported to 40 journals in 2014 and 2015 for running misleading
images, only a third had been corrected or retracted five years later,
she said."

https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/think-of-the-implications-of-publishing

"Not many would remember the intellectual hoax in 1996 that exposed our academic research industry, particularly in the humanities.
Math and physics Professor Alan Sokal’s paper, "Transgressing the
Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity,"
was
published by a leading academic journal in North America despite being
nothing more than a bunch of highfalutin nonsense.
Sokal and Jean Brimont’s book Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern
Intellectuals' Abuse of Science is worth a read to understand how the
use of
incomprehensible jargon can quickly develop an aura of academic
respectability around mediocre talent."

"As a scientist who co-authored papers in 80 different journals, the
most painful experiences that I had were two instances in which someone
else published my work as their own.
In one case the supposed author--who I had never heard of-- merely
reworded a few sentences slightly and got the paper republished the
paper under his name.
In the other case, I knew the theoretical physicist author who
published my experimental discovery as his own work, and
also used my name fraudulently to help get a National Science Foundation
grant. Afterwards he NSF called me a few times about
formally investigating his actions, but to my knowledge it never did."


--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Band of Debunkers Busting Bad Scientists...

Go to first: https://www.drudgereport.com/

then click the headline

The Band of Debunkers Busting Bad Scientists...

dat will pass the paywall of WSJ article.

Those of yous that already
have the knowhow:

https://www.wsj.com/science/data-colada-debunk-stanford-president-research-14664f3?mod=hp_lead_pos8

Here are a few excepts:

https://retractionwatch.com/2022/12/27/nearing-5000-retractions-a-review-of-2022/

https://datacolada.org/

https://datacolada.org/109

https://pubpeer.com/

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-25331-001

Retraction Watch, which with research organization
Crossref keep a log of some 50,000 papers discredited over the past
century,
https://retractionwatch.com/ https://www.crossref.org/images/blog/2023/sample-record-retraction-watch-border.png

“If you take the sleuths out of the equation,” Oransky said, “it’s very difficult to see how most of these retractions would have happened.”

"Bad data goes undetected in academic journals largely because the publications rely on volunteer experts to ensure the quality of
published work, not to detect fraud. Journals don’t have the expertise
or personnel to examine underlying data for errors or
deliberate manipulation, said Holden Thorp, editor in chief of the
Science family of journals."

"Bik and others said it can take months or years for journals to resolve complaints about suspect studies. Of nearly 800 papers that
Bik reported to 40 journals in 2014 and 2015 for running misleading
images, only a third had been corrected or retracted five years later,
she said."

https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/think-of-the-implications-of-publishing

"Not many would remember the intellectual hoax in 1996 that exposed our academic research industry, particularly in the humanities.
Math and physics Professor Alan Sokal’s paper, "Transgressing the
Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity,"
was
published by a leading academic journal in North America despite being nothing more than a bunch of highfalutin nonsense.
Sokal and Jean Brimont’s book Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern
Intellectuals' Abuse of Science is worth a read to understand how the
use of
incomprehensible jargon can quickly develop an aura of academic respectability around mediocre talent."

In other words, if someone stamps your paper with 'gobbledygook' on
it...

you reached an 'aura of academic respectability'!!!!

highfalutin nonsense and incomprehensible jargon IS THE WAY TO GO!!!!

keep up the good work.


Can you imagine Jan working at a leading academic journal?
gobbledygook
gobbledygook
gobbledygook
gobbledygook
gobbledygookgobbledygook
gobbledygook gobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygook
gobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygookgobbledygook


ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh i quit!!!!

get a new hobby..











--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

On 9/24/2023 2:15 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

dat will pass the patwall of WSJ article.

Wait a sec. Do you know how to pass the paywall for Jstor? (https://www.jstor.org/)

When my search gets there, it stops right there. The suckers want $45
per article.

If you know how, be careful. Aaron Swartz got hanged as a result of
making such articles available. But usenet is hopefully safe enough :)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

The Starmaker wrote:

Physfitfreak wrote:

On 9/24/2023 2:15 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

dat will pass the patwall of WSJ article.

Wait a sec. Do you know how to pass the paywall for Jstor? (https://www.jstor.org/)

When my search gets there, it stops right there. The suckers want $45
per article.

there must be hundreds of different ways to do it https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=never+pay+for+articles+in+jstor

or do a google search for "jstor org bypass paywalls"

and it's fun! (when you find one that works)

Why do you think Richard Feyman cracks safes?

it's fun!

Bill Gates said..."Where these is a lock, there is a key."

If others have sove the problem, so can you.

Solve problems that other people have solved.

When was the last time you bought software????

Someone once said...Walls are built to keep 'OTHER' people out.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Piracy/comments/rs9ej1/paywall_bypass_superlist/




wats jstor?



--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

Physfitfreak wrote:

On 9/24/2023 2:15 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

dat will pass the patwall of WSJ article.

Wait a sec. Do you know how to pass the paywall for Jstor? (https://www.jstor.org/)

When my search gets there, it stops right there. The suckers want $45
per article.

there must be hundreds of different ways to do it https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=never+pay+for+articles+in+jstor

or do a google search for "jstor org bypass paywalls"


and it's fun! (when you find one that works)

Why do you think Richard Feyman cracks safes?


it's fun!


Bill Gates said..."Where these is a lock, there is a key."

If others have sove the problem, so can you.

Solve problems that other people have solved.


When was the last time you bought software????


--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

On 9/24/2023 11:27 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

Physfitfreak wrote:

On 9/24/2023 2:15 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

dat will pass the patwall of WSJ article.

Wait a sec. Do you know how to pass the paywall for Jstor?
(https://www.jstor.org/)

When my search gets there, it stops right there. The suckers want $45
per article.

there must be hundreds of different ways to do it https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=never+pay+for+articles+in+jstor

or do a google search for "jstor org bypass paywalls"

and it's fun! (when you find one that works)

Why do you think Richard Feyman cracks safes?

it's fun!

Bill Gates said..."Where these is a lock, there is a key."

If others have sove the problem, so can you.

Solve problems that other people have solved.

When was the last time you bought software????

For "fun" I'd do it, yes. But it's not been fun for me to spend my time
and get sidetracked by some nonsense others throw in my way.

But the searches I make keep taking me to that site.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

On 9/24/2023 3:34 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

"Bad data goes undetected in academic journals largely because the publications rely on volunteer experts to ensure the quality of
published work, not to detect fraud. Journals don’t have the expertise
or personnel to examine underlying data for errors or
deliberate manipulation, said Holden Thorp, editor in chief of the
Science family of journals."

The "expertise" the above quote refers to, is found only in scientists.
For the task, an "engineer" is a useless less expensive fraud that
businesses and government both have placed there in those positions to
say, "We have the matter under control."

USA has had "engineers" occupying virtually all scientists' positions
since 1980. It gradually began in early 1960s, and grew as computers
became more and more prevalent and used, cause with the use of
computers, "expertise" could be faked. It took from early 1960s to 1980
for the take-over to get completed.

You cannot correct this at that level. The three guys are wasting their
time if that's what their motives are. When they're all selling rotten
apples, you can't "correct" this. You leave them behind and go to
another grocer elsewhere in the world.

Things will, and are going elsewhere. For the first time in history,
Samsung in 2022 beat IBM in number of patents received. Before 2022 it
had always been IBM at the top. You can't correct this.

The three are just making a joke out of it, cause it is also funny to a
good extent to see a country like the USA of 1960s proclaiming more and
more supremacy as its authority steadily diminishes, weakens, and
deteriorates. It's not just bitter, it's a funny scene too :)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

On 9/24/2023 3:34 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

In the other case, I knew the theoretical physicist author who
published my experimental discovery as his own work, and
also used my name fraudulently to help get a National Science Foundation grant. Afterwards he NSF called me a few times about
formally investigating his actions, but to my knowledge it never did."

That "theoretical physicist" was not a physicist. I can bet, right now,
that he was a smart aleck "engineer."

The inferiority felt in an "engineer" has no bounds. They do anything.
This "Jim Pennino" has spent more than two decades of his life in a
physics forum just to fight with those who know physics.

They're prostitutes who later after retiring go to Churches to fake
virtue. What else is left for a life-time prostitute to do.

They all knew their positions belonged to scientists, cause they
couldn't do it right. Yet they kept prostituting for the businesses or
the government who'd hired them.

Ross Perot, an ex-IBM salesman, was _proud_ of the fact that scientists
were serving dinner tables in Dallas restaurants. He even boasted with
that right on TV.

The inferiority complex in non-scientists has no bounds. They're
prostitutes when compared to scientists.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

On 9/25/2023 12:07 AM, The Starmaker wrote:

wats jstor?

I don't quite know. Really just a means of throwing obstacles in the way
of those who want access to older journal articles.

Nothing beats a top research library even today, as limited as it is
(you cannot borrow journals and take them home with you, like you can
with books). When digital depositories formed, it was first truly free
for anybody to see such contents, now all of them are controlled by
smart alecks.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity

On 9/24/2023 11:27 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

Why do you think Richard Feyman cracks safes?

He did it because he was bored to death in that crazy place. It was like
a prison to him.

I have had better options regarding Jstor and the like.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)