Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Science is no more; GONE forever
30 views
Skip to first unread message
JTEM
Sep 16, 2021, 3:04:28 PM9/16/21
to
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07245-9
Peer review minus the peers!
The Ministry of Truth is in full control now. The politicalization
of science THAT WE ALL LIVED THROUGH starting in the Bush
years is now absolute.
1984 came a little bit late, albeit, but it turned out to be worse
than we thought.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/662426928409640960
JWS
Sep 17, 2021, 4:33:40 AM9/17/21
to
On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 2:04:28 PM UTC-5, JTEM wrote:
> https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07245-9
>
> Peer review minus the peers!
>
> The Ministry of Truth is in full control now. The politicalization
> of science THAT WE ALL LIVED THROUGH starting in the Bush
> years is now absolute.
>
> 1984 came a little bit late, albeit, but it turned out to be worse
> than we thought.
You are such a fucking idiot that it's amazing
> https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07245-9
>
> Peer review minus the peers!
>
> The Ministry of Truth is in full control now. The politicalization
> of science THAT WE ALL LIVED THROUGH starting in the Bush
> years is now absolute.
>
> 1984 came a little bit late, albeit, but it turned out to be worse
> than we thought.
that you can type on a keyboard. Does your
mommy do it for you or do you have speech
to text software?
JTEM
Sep 17, 2021, 11:00:30 PM9/17/21
to
JWS wrote:
> You are such a
It's so totally understandable why you'd rudely defend "Peer Review"
absent any peers. It's such a threat to you, any challenge to peer
review absent the peers...
You should be especially offended by anyone not supporting automated
systems which determine what a paper is about, because that's important
when judging it... right?
Imagine, speaking rhetorically, if these "Tools" were in use back during the
Dubya Bush years when people were fearful of any science, any research
pertaining to evolution, as it offended the people who own science at the
time...
Yes, I can see why denying such joyous circumstances would upset you the
way it does.
...meanwhile my spell checker was totally baffled because I typed an
's' instead of a 'c' in circumstances...
Ah, my dear; may the slaughter you invite visit you & yours first amongst us.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/662527882140270592
> You are such a
It's so totally understandable why you'd rudely defend "Peer Review"
absent any peers. It's such a threat to you, any challenge to peer
review absent the peers...
You should be especially offended by anyone not supporting automated
systems which determine what a paper is about, because that's important
when judging it... right?
Imagine, speaking rhetorically, if these "Tools" were in use back during the
Dubya Bush years when people were fearful of any science, any research
pertaining to evolution, as it offended the people who own science at the
time...
Yes, I can see why denying such joyous circumstances would upset you the
way it does.
...meanwhile my spell checker was totally baffled because I typed an
's' instead of a 'c' in circumstances...
Ah, my dear; may the slaughter you invite visit you & yours first amongst us.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/662527882140270592
Ted
Sep 18, 2021, 3:23:11 PM9/18/21
to
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 20:00:28 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Indeed. It's because you're a shit eater.
wrote:
> JWS wrote:
> > You are such a
> It's so totally understandable why I eat shit.
> > You are such a
Indeed. It's because you're a shit eater.
JTEM
Sep 20, 2021, 12:33:54 PM9/20/21
to
Not named, Jack Sovalot wrote:
> My D.I.D. provides an unlimited supply of personalities, all
> quite fucked up.
You're upset this time because I don't like "Peer Review" without
any peers. That's how fucked up you are.
...it's here where you pretend that you don't have a JTEM
obsession.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/662780587439964160
> My D.I.D. provides an unlimited supply of personalities, all
> quite fucked up.
You're upset this time because I don't like "Peer Review" without
any peers. That's how fucked up you are.
...it's here where you pretend that you don't have a JTEM
obsession.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/662780587439964160
Michelle Malkin
Sep 20, 2021, 12:41:44 PM9/20/21
to
On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 12:33:54 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
> Not named, Jack Sovalot wrote:
>
> > My D.I.D. provides an unlimited supply of personalities, all
> > quite fucked up.
>
> You're upset this time because I don't like "Peer Review" without
> any peers. That's how fucked up you are.
>
> ...it's here where you pretend that you don't have a JTEM
> obsession.
Every time you write this, your ego collapses a little bit more,
> Not named, Jack Sovalot wrote:
>
> > My D.I.D. provides an unlimited supply of personalities, all
> > quite fucked up.
>
> You're upset this time because I don't like "Peer Review" without
> any peers. That's how fucked up you are.
>
> ...it's here where you pretend that you don't have a JTEM
> obsession.
poor failure John McGuinness. You write it quite often.
Ted
Sep 21, 2021, 9:59:22 AM9/21/21
to
On Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:33:52 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I'm upset this time because I don't like
> "Dick Sucking" without
> any dicks. That's how fucked up I am.
I see.
wrote:
> I'm upset this time because I don't like
> "Dick Sucking" without
> any dicks. That's how fucked up I am.
I see.
Ted
Sep 21, 2021, 10:00:25 AM9/21/21
to
JTEM
Oct 10, 2021, 3:06:39 PM10/10/21
to
Cowering behind this fake name, Jack Sovalot wrote:
[Transparent]
You really are emotional in your defense of Robo reviews. That, or
you are desperate for JTEM. Not that the multiple replies makes
you look any worse... well, yeah, it does.
Pathetic.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/664684434922078208
Ted
Oct 10, 2021, 5:04:21 PM10/10/21
to
On Sun, 10 Oct 2021 12:06:37 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Jack Sovalot wrote:
> > What are you, JTEM?
> Pathetic.
True.
wrote:
> Jack Sovalot wrote:
> > What are you, JTEM?
> Pathetic.
True.
0 new messages