Joined: April 2007
|Quote (coldfirephoenix @ Sep. 10 2017,12:19)|
|Quote (ChemiCat @ Sep. 10 2017,02:51)|
|The "publish or perish" mentality is rearing its ugly head again. Help figuring out how to explain this outside of the how-to environment that I thrive in is not allowed. |
Those who do not do everything on their own then crawl on their knees to a publisher will have their work trashed, until they do. Then after that there is one more paper in one of thousands of journals few people actually keep up with, especially in the how-to community. After factoring in how much is kept a trade secret or for some other reason was never published it's actually a bad way to try keeping up all happening in science.
I'm very against this form of academic snobbery, I'm now helping to make gone. Get real please.
And we are back into Gaulinese. The words are English but in this order are otherwise meaningless.
Here are a few "how to" questions for you Gaulin;
1) How to determine "molecular intelligence?
2) How to determine "Cellular intelligence"?
3) How to determine if single cell clusters are "intelligent"?
Feel free to ignore answering these questions because you can't even attempt them with your "theory".
If your "theory" cannot provide evidence for any of these it is bullshit. (yes, I know it is bullshit).
And "real" has been added to the Gaulinese dictionary as another word Gaulin doesn't understand.
What is he even trying to say here? I read this 3 times, and I genuinely can't find a logical connection. I get his motivation behind the post: He wants to continue playing scientist, so he needs an excuse for the fact that he never has been published and never will be published, by somehow railing against peer review.
But what he's actually saying literally doesn't seem to even have a connection to that, or anything else for that matter. Seriously, can someone help me understand this incoherent assortment of words?
|The "publish or perish" mentality is rearing its ugly head again.|
My best guess here is that Gary does not know what the phrase is meant to convey, because it doesn't apply to him at all, seeing how he is not in academia, has never published anything, and is doing his wordsalad out of his own volition from his basement.
|Help figuring out how to explain this outside of the how-to environment that I thrive in is not allowed.|
WHAT? Explain what? All he has mentioned before was the "publish-or-perish-mentality". Why would that need explaining? And why would it not be allowed to help figuring out how it explain it? Who doesn't allow it? And what the hell is the "how-to-environment"?
Also, I'm pretty sure it's another delusion that Gary "strives" in it. So far, at any point that Gary has posted his nonsense-"theory" on any platform, it was resoundingly rejected. I posted quotes from the kurzweil-forums to his "theory" in my last post. I was there when he presented it to reddit (the same, rejected as unscientific and stupid), and you guys know how well it worked out out here. So I have yet to see any community that doesn't immediately see through this pile of not even pseudoscience. (The only ones who are kinda open to it are other cdesign proponentsists)
So, please Gary, show us where we can find the responses of this "how-to-environment" to your "theory"! I wanna see you thrive.
|Those who do not do everything on their own then crawl on their knees to a publisher will have their work trashed, until they do. |
What the hell is he trying to communicate here? That you have to do everything on your own to get through peer-review? There are lots of team, co-authors and so on, cooperation is a huge part of academia. So he can't really mean that. But then again, I have no idea what he could mean.
|Then after that there is one more paper in one of thousands of journals few people actually keep up with, especially in the how-to community.|
Hey! Apart from the weird grammar and the mention of this unexplained "how-to-community", this sentence is pretty straighforward. It's still wrong, stupid, and demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding about how science works, but hey, at least I understood what he to say.
|After factoring in how much is kept a trade secret or for some other reason was never published it's actually a bad way to try keeping up all happening in science.|
Oh, okay, we're back to sentences that don't even relate to anything. I guess he is railing against peer-review again? Does he now think he has a better alternative? Is it "posting" blogs at random people on the internet? We'll never know.
Anyone up to helping me interpret this weird gibberish?
Oh stewardess, I speak Gaulinese.
Gary has misunderstood Wesley's request to look at his references to see how hypocritical he's being about old information as a request for proof of where Gary is published. Gary believes peer review is rigged against him because he was told at some point in the past that he couldn't get funding as just some random crank on the internet, and those who know how science works have told him is notions are too incoherent to publish.
So Gary thinks he would be forced to slave away without all the money the academic scientists are unfairly hoarding, then have them "trash" his genius by pointing out all the flaws in it. And he's thrown in a little swipe at corporate research being corrupt for good measure. He believes this is all "snobbery" rather than the legitimate rejection of an uneducated lunatic with delusions of grandeur.
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr
"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin