Liberals deleting academic papers

The money shot boys. Spread it far and wide

Attached: IMG_2224.png (1536x2048, 401K)

Doesnt matter. "Pier reviewed" papers are a joke. Most of the reviewers are not even scientists and they dont try to recreate the experiment.

Its a bunch of liberals that read the paper and go " Yep, that pleases my ideology!"

Came here

To post this

And be a faggot

Bump, lol

I have reviewed your post and give it a A+. Faggotry is welcome here.

Gotta love how they invent entire fields like Gender Studies which are based on unfalsifiable theories, and accuse mathematicians of bias and move to censor them.

This wasn't an experiment but a theory.

Kill leftist academics

honestly what the fuck do you think this is all leading up to? They are trying to draw a bag around you, draw it closed, and beat you to death. Fight before you're stuck in the bag.

this, it is barely more complicated than that at all

Attached: IMG_1814.png (1536x2048, 1.2M)

This. Here is an in depth look at the history of this (((scientific))) fraud
youtu.be/1BWIzaLVkKQ

get more right wingers in academia

>Doesnt matter. "Pier reviewed" papers are a joke.

not when:

>"But, that same day, the Mathematical Intelligencer’s editor-in-chief Marjorie Senechal notified us that, with “deep regret,” she was rescinding her previous acceptance of our paper. “Several colleagues,” she wrote, had warned her that publication would provoke “extremely strong reactions” and there existed a “very real possibility that the right-wing media may pick this up and hype it internationally.” For the second time in a single day I was left flabbergasted. Working mathematicians are usually thrilled if even five people in the world read our latest article. Now some progressive faction was worried that a fairly straightforward logical argument about male variability might encourage the conservative press to actually read and cite a science paper?"

>math.uchicago.edu/~wilkinso/Statement.html
i dunno user, she says she didn't do it....

Attached: 1536766398007.png (350x419, 30K)

that would imply they cared more about diversity of opinions than diversity of ethnicity

>i dunno user, she says she didn't do it....

Here it says she did:

quillette.com/2018/09/07/academic-activists-send-a-published-paper-down-the-memory-hole/

Attached: 1472571304913.jpg (780x546, 110K)

ah now I remember why I stopped coming here

Not sure what you are implying but this story only shows that this the reality. "Pier reviewed' has as much meaning as 'my facebook friends all agree!"

Yeah, because the truth hurts. This is what science has become, another politicized social platform.

>based STEM

Ok so now you understand this point how about sharing it with others like carry some of this info to that place

You

Came

From

Download them and keep them safe?

This

Attached: wp_ss_20180916_0001.png (540x960, 403K)

>This is what science has become
>this is what the social and enviromental sciences have become from the circle jerking of misinformation/hyperbole inner-departmentally and the lambasting from the media
ftfy. Peer-reviewing is a pretty reliable system elsewhere.

>Your inconvenient facts are fucking up our progressive narrative

Attached: checkd.gif (500x213, 991K)

It says she argued against publication then she says the person she emailed pulled the publication. Read it.

>Real science has gone
ftfy
Science is the new Papacy.

>left deletes crime and gender data
>right deletes climate data

No, its not actually. Dumb people cite is like its some sort of authority with out knowing what it means. Some of the experiments are done and found to be unrepeatable. It may have started out good with good intentions but its been corrupted by the Left as all things the left touches. Now its a joke full of fake science.

>what is climategate
it was left people deleting climate data

Again, people deleting what does not confirm their opinion in an incredible amount of bias. Climategate is just a meme compared to everything else.

not all peer review is the same

>pier

You want to know how I know this is bait?

Attached: pier.jpg (790x350, 300K)

And this is why I'm having trouble believing peer reviewed shit atm

>academia is lost
Pretty much so. James Watson (Watson and Crick DNA structure) was figuratively nailed upside down on a gas station by (((academia))) when he said that Bantu Africans had undergone selection for something other than intelligence.

Imagine what is going on with infectious disease and rampant immigrants.

Let me just make sure I heard you correctly. Your argument is that because in some realms of academia published research can get muddled up by lefty antics, so therefore peer-reviewing is broken? I suppose then that research that coincides with your opinion, coming from these same universities, is the stuff that doesn't get interfered with. I highly doubt you know jack shit about how publishing in a journal works.

He was saying that the idea that acedemia is extremely biased against anything that would say that one of the "minority" groups is weaker or not as "equal" as the "majority" groups; and that this has been known by the people who frequent this website regularly for years now. Not that the rejection of this particular paper is old news.

Please read this post. In my opinion this user knows.

A Dutch professor researched the impact of immigration and one of the things he found out that a non western immigrants costs on average over €350k over a lifetime and that a Dutch person costs €60k over a lifetime, and that €350k is unsustainable while €60k you can do indefinitely.
He had to stop teaching.

You're a dumb nigger if you think there aren't people who would love to challenge such a controversial topic and get the truth credited to their name as an achievement.

That's how science works, intelligent people compete to prove or disprove each others theories whole retards like you sit on the sidelines and have the papers spoonfed to you by sensationalization.

Never forget that acedemic papers only ever show positive results, because if you try to publish a failed experiment no one will pick it up. The publishers of acedemic papers have fostered an environment that promotes fraud just to get published, and you should never fully trust acedemic results that are publish until you actually try the experiment yourself and can replicate the results.

Lets just say this. I would not make any decisions based on a reviewed paper no matter how much I agreed with it. I would also warn people that in advance if I was citing a from one, not to take it to seriously.

But im not a politician and politicians do this shit all the time. Its fake science until its show that it can be replicated.

i will attempt to break this down, but im no expert but i believe what the other person is arguing.
there's a lot of funding within government and privately for strong agenda based research. the second research goes outside the agenda it loses funding, you cannot get funded with controversial topics either. i'm not sure why you can't but i haven't seen many controversial topics getting funding. the few rare ones that do end up being muddled by opposing forces. either through character assassination of the scientists or poking holes in any of the methods used. this wouldn't be bad if the more liberal studies got the same scrutiny, which would show there's fall apart just as bad if not worse.

your broken english is a headache. Never post again

Read about Gary Webb. All knowledge and truth is good until it is actually threatening to the establishment. I’m sure the majority of peer reviewed journal articles are valid, but the ones that are threatening get filtered, as this case among others demonstrates.

>All knowledge and truth is good until it is actually threatening to the establishment. I’m sure the majority of peer reviewed journal articles are valid, but the ones that are threatening get filtered
yup, this is what I was trying to say in so many words

I read that whole thing the same week it happend. Like most of us did.

The sjw cancer is being monitored. They think they rule the HR world. They will be shocked in the coming years. Several prominent societies have awaken to the stasi like behaviour.

They will be shunned en mas. Joining the sjw movement is career suicide at this point. Short term masochistic reward vs long term intellectual reward.

Attached: academia.jpg (480x455, 47K)

this is why commies purge intellectuals btw

Attached: received_139080100073454.jpg (720x518, 50K)

Nice r3ddit spacin

Of course there's bias in funding and power structures. Why do you think the Catholic Church supressed Galileo? That didn't stop him from getting his findings out and only nominally renouncing them on pain of death while everybody intelligent knew the truth.

There's plenty of right wing think tanks that would send money towards experiments that may be unpalatable to mainstream SJW culture in part or in full.
It's not an excuse at this point.

Can someone tell me why this is being memory-holed? I'm far from a normal Jow Forumstard (but not a 'liberal' either), but I can't see what the fuss is about. It's widely known that the distribution curve is both higher nad lower for males, why is this problematic now?

(((They)) have been doing this for years.
Academia is controlled so that appeals to authority can be controlled. If you try to alter the message from within the system, you are black-balled in academia. That means you will have spent years working on a career, only to find that you can't use your education outside of the classroom. Academics are all so paranoid about keeping their jobs they will tow the party line. They are often unionized at the PreK-12th grade levels and they have annual contracts at Undergrad-Postgrad levels.

Anything that is off message gets un-funded or rejected by Internal Review Boards. Truth is not a factor here. It's about being on message. All research proceeds from bias and the bias in nearly all of academia is Severely Leftist.

Cutting general federal grant funding for "research" and reducing or eliminating federal funding for student loans will put pressure on these institutions. In the mean time, join the economy and learn a trade. Trades will not ebb and flow with public opinion or even public policy. You can be an electrician in an up economy or a down economy without any interruption of income.

Attached: popup-v2[1].jpg (366x439, 53K)

You're right to think this is relatively inconsequential in reality.

The problem was that media might sensationalize it in a way to say most women are normies or something and that the intelligent ones should get thrown under the bus.

that's actually incorrect about galileo. i suggest you read up on the dark ages and how the church actually supported these scientists. the church's strict structure allowed for the renaissance to happen.
the church didn't like galileo because he was an asshole to them and disrespected their authority. which, you didn't do then. they accepted his theories.
the right wing think tanks have to worry about image/reputation. they cannot fund huge studies on something like racial science. it would make them look more like racists and hurt conservatives. i showed you what happens when they do fund something controversial (poke holes). there's more money in the liberal agenda ones.

I think there is a resurgence of oven-phobia because at this point in time jews have not yet learned to be ovencrispy. And I think we are going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Jews are not going to be the body temperature entities they once were in the last century. Ovens are going to be at the centre of that. It's a huge transformation for jews to make. They are now going into baked mode and ovens will be resented for their leading role. But without that leading role and without that transformation, jews will not survive.

This has almost always been the case in all of history, especially when people blindly followed the Catholic Church and monks did research under their tutelage or that of a patron king.

You have to find funding from people and groups who will support you.

Ahhhhh, I get it. Thanks user. People can be insidious with the angles of attack they come up with, I never would have thought of that one.

it means the wage gap is based on merit instead of some bizarre conspiracy by men to oppress women of equal capability

>the church's strict structure allowed for the renaissance to happen
By means of funding and safety, maybe. But the fundamental structure and adherence to a religious organization by the masses meant that your discoveries could butt heads with very powerful and corrupt people within the Church or a government who disagreed with your findings, much like today.

The Church only accepted his findings after he died. The literal Inquisition, similar to SJW hounds these days, was going after anyone who challenged the status quo.

The Renaissance was important, but the Enlightenment was when true scientific thought and acceptance of challenging authority and history became widespread enough to have benefits for Western civilization.

Real science happens in the military and private corporations.

>Science historian David C. Lindberg criticised the public use of 'dark ages' to describe the entire Middle Ages as "a time of ignorance, barbarism and superstition" for which "blame is most often laid at the feet of the Christian church, which is alleged to have placed religious authority over personal experience and rational activity".[47] Historian of science Edward Grant writes that "If revolutionary rational thoughts were expressed in the Age of Reason, they were made possible because of the long medieval tradition that established the use of reason as one of the most important of human activities".[48] Furthermore, Lindberg says that, contrary to common belief, "the late medieval scholar rarely experienced the coercive power of the church and would have regarded himself as free (particularly in the natural sciences) to follow reason and observation wherever they led".[49] Because of the collapse of the Western Roman Empire due to the Migration Period a lot of classical Greek texts were lost there, but part of these texts survived and they were studied widely in the Byzantine Empire and the Abbasid Caliphate. Around the eleventh and twelfth centuries in the High Middle Ages stronger monarchies emerged; borders were restored after the invasions of Vikings and Magyars; technological developments and agricultural innovations were made which increased the food supply and population. And the rejuvenation of science and scholarship in the West was due in large part to the new availability of Latin translations of Aristotle.[50]

>Another view of the period is reflected by more specific notions such as the 19th-century claim[51][52] that everyone in the Middle Ages thought the world was flat.[52][53] In fact, lecturers in medieval universities commonly advanced the idea that the Earth was a sphere.[54] Lindberg and Ronald Numbers write: "There was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference".[55] Other misconceptions such as: "the Church prohibited autopsies and dissections during the Middle Ages", "the rise of Christianity killed off ancient science", and "the medieval Christian church suppressed the growth of natural philosophy", are cited by Numbers as examples of myths that still pass as historical truth, although unsupported by current research.[56]

that's from wikipedia disproving what you're saying and proving what i was stating. enlightment was not just questioning the current church, but more freedom to the access of knowledge for economic reasons and timing.

Have you ever done research, published, or even attempted to publish a scientific paper? The peer review process is a joke. "Peers" review your paper and determine whether or not they feel it sounds reasonable. They do not attempt to duplicate your findings, they do not spend any real time or effort assessing the legitimacy of your work.

This is normal. I know an economist who found out Sikh's are the biggest abusers of sex-selective abortions where ever they are.

They didn't publish it.

The Burning of the Books has begun once again, and once again to protect the narrow interests of international monopoly financial capital.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Divergence

It's not only about how the academics functioned, but society as a whole. They may have fostered a slow rate of technological and other development, but obscurantism and limiting the dissemination of knowledge and literacy freely (one of the reasons Protestants separated from the Church) kept the Europeans at roughly the same level as other civilizations.

>not just questioning the current church, but more freedom to the access of knowledge for economic reasons and timing.

Yes, all of those were and are still key to advancement.

>right wing think tanks have to worry about image

That's more of an issue with their funding sources then? Regardless, you have to make do with what's available to you money and facility wise and innovate and gather data around whatever roadblocks you may encounter. That's part of an efficient scientific process.

>peer review durr
>citing some nigger as source of authority
really made me thenkz

this doesn't seem to disprove my claims though and doesn't support your initial argument. let me know if i'm misconstruing your argument.
the church was a positive force and embraced new knowledge and theories, even if it questioned their original beliefs. you just had to do it through the confines of the church and be respectful. so, it's like don't expect to get funded and supported if you're calling them all faggots and weebs and go outside the system.
this strict system of going through the church, during that time, was so there wasn't muddling of knowledge. it wasn't a negative thing at all, and it was necessary. without it, enlightenment wouldn't have happened.

My favorite way of archiving things it posting what I find on Jow Forums and then letting autists save it to their own computers. Then the autists spread it around the internet even more, and thus the cycle of life continues.

Many times they can’t even recreate the experiment. 70% of scientists say they have at one time or another not been able to reproduce experiments. I can’t cite this as I’m on my phone look it up though. I personally have seen incredibly crappy chinese/Indian/Iranian papers that claim experimental results that no one can do. Plus just think about the fact that some nigger with a shit sat score got into all the Ivy League schools. It’s cooked. They ruined higher education.

Not really possible to ‘experiment’ with math. It’s all theories.

>Kill leftist academics
Funny thing is, that's the ending either way. They get purged if the right wins and they also get purged if the left wins.

Attached: useful idiots.jpg (488x693, 95K)

it's not like that, there's some things that are simply impossible for the general public to accept, even if it's true. it could be damaging. i hate to say this, but it's simply true.
there's things that are easy to accept and has more support, those are the things that get funded by conservative think tanks. like self defense and pro-gun arguments in the USA.
something like racial science, and your research is undeniably proving that black people are inferior. good luck. you are shooting yourself in the foot.
meanwhile a study that says diversity is good and countries need more mass immigration and refugees? easy to fund and no one will call for your head/career.
"hate facts" is a real thing. unfortunately you have to think about things politically and the long game, not the short game.

To the idiot administrations of colleges, the latter implies the former. When you blackbag everyone who proves that niggers are stupid and have no place in colleges, this is what you get. I say this as someone who knew a kid from Swaziland who did in fact deserve to be there. But we need to stop making rules based on exceptions.

That comic is funny but this is what destroys families. We’re not biologically designed to work like that. This causes wives to resent their husbands because they can’t figure out how they actually feel.

There are two major scientific experiments done that are always cited for evolution. One cant be replicated and the other creates poison. Yet, because its ideologically sound, they cite them.

You’re an idiot if you don’t think that there is a serious issue with the academic world right now. I take it you never got up close to it.

>download it
>host a server for academic papers
>upload it
>??
>profit

Easy peasy.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
>The replication crisis (or replicability crisis or reproducibility crisis) is an ongoing methodological crisis in science in which scholars have found that the results of many scientific studies are difficult or impossible to replicate or reproduce on subsequent investigation, either by independent researchers or by the original researchers themselves.[1][2] The crisis has long-standing roots; the phrase was coined in the early 2010s[3] as part of a growing awareness of the problem.
>Because the reproducibility of experiments is an essential part of the scientific method,[4] the inability to replicate the studies of others has potentially grave consequences for many fields of science in which significant theories are grounded on unreproducible experimental work.
>The replication crisis has been particularly widely discussed in the field of psychology (and in particular, social psychology) and in medicine, where a number of efforts have been made to re-investigate classic results, and to attempt to determine both the reliability of the results, and, if found to be unreliable, the reasons for the failure of replication.[5][6]

Not what happens num nuts. Lefties were caught fudging data. When you fudge data then it’s garbage.

spread these

Attached: 1537063507419.png (1058x1447, 146K)

Attached: 1537063746639.png (1905x1865, 840K)

Yea thanks. I like how it says some fields are much more affected than others. I know that personally as someone who studied synthetic organic chemistry.

Lets be serious for a moment. Anyone who has not noticed that niggers and sandniggers are less intelligent than whites are just burying their heads in the sand and you wont get through to them even if you rape them with 1000 niggers.

Of course not the idea is to win over people in the middle who kinda notice niggers are stupid but need reinforcement to drive it home.

Didn't IQ studies display the same exact results? Not exactly revolutionary stuff, but any evidence of academia censoring papers is valuable none the less. This has been going on for years now, but there is very little talk about it.

i love to say sociology and psychology are not science and watch people's heads explode. the fields are completely taken over to prove agendas. until they fix this shit, it's not science.

Sci hub.tw will get it all for free. Fuck publishers, they don't deserve shit.

This is unconscionable. The consideration of theories like this could go a long way toward reducing a lot of people's anger and frustration. Lacking access to reasonable explanations like this, they're led to believe that any differences in observed outcome (performance, aptitude or even INTEREST) are entirely the result of nefarious entrenched social factors. The people who quash studies like this, far from protecting people from the harm of insult they presume they can't handle (how condescending is that), are actually forcing them into a state of avoidable cognitive dissonance. It's not even hard to understand (pic related). These people want to engineer ignorance. They're sadists, they want to sentence people to emotional turmoil. It's monstrous.

Attached: curves.png (1080x658, 109K)