- Teen girls locked up in religious compounds – Stories of mistreatment at a Missouri girls’ home that depicts itself as a place for troubled teen girls to get their lives back on track and closer to god.
- On being a feminist boy – Showing that feminists can have a sense of humor.
- Why are scientific retractions increasing? – From cerberus40.
- The reason why you’re single – If you think it’s because all the women around you are ugly, it’s actually because you’re a douchebag.
The Wired article is just a string of nonsensical blah-blah.
It talks about percentage increases and 15-fold jumps; this all means nothing without absolute numbers (which are conveniently not provided).
Science should applaud those who admit their mistakes, not wring their hand over more mistakes being caught. Perhaps if we, as a society, were not so loath to actually fund scientific endevours (without pressing for the most profitable outcomes) we wouldn’t have so many questionable papers being published.
.
I think this is yet another example of using numbers in such a way as to back your agenda. I can’t believe that a respected paper like the Wall Street Jour… Wait, well there’s you problem.
.
There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Mark Twain
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/science_is_self-correcting_…_sort_of/
The author of this piece actually provides the numbers. Seems this is becoming a bit of an issue.
Yes, that sort of adds to my argument. It went from a rediculously low 22 retractions in 2001 to 339 last year out of 11,000 published papers. (around 3%)
But what are the reasons for that? I’m not saying there is no problem; you obviously try to approach zero retractions, but how realistic is that? Would publishing negative outcomes (something that journals are reluctant to do)change the reatraction rate? What about corroborative studies?
So, is there a problem? Yes, but I don’t think it’s time to turn Chicken Little just yet.
Yes, people should applaud those who print retractions, but that’s not REALLY the problem raised, or at least not the only one. First is that this may be indicative of sloppier work – maybe not, but it’s hard to tell.
Second, and more important, is the apparent proclivity to cite retracted articles and hypotheses. this is a pretty big problem, because it creates a whole set of research that is at best tainted by poor vetting, and at worst becomes a series of ever-worsening errors that steers research away from reality. While in THEORY, this will eventually be corrected by observations of reality, it creates delays, misconceptions, and makes it much harder to accept the results of research that does NOT have this problem.
Tack on to that the fact that the majority of people have trouble telling peer-reviewed sources from non-peer reviewed, and you have a problem that will increase distrust in science overall, and strengthen the denialism of certain parties on certain issues.
Retractions are a good thing, but the apparent love for self-confirmation seems to be outweighing the use of a solid vetting process to cut out retracted articles, and THAT is a very big problem.
This is a good warning, and a good article, if for that reason only.
Aboit blag hags reason your single. Being a penis owner myself I don’t like the assumption that, I’m simply talking to someone because I want them sexually and I’m trying to “score” . This very rarely happens in the 3D world but often happens online where I declare my gender. It takes a little while with some people to realise I’m not trying to impress anyone just enjoying myself and their company. If your are atracted to someone and declare that then your back to square one even if they like and desire you with them thinking Oh yes that’s why they were so nice. I’m not chasing anyone, they can chase me :) ha ha I was more androsexual gay men don’t have this cultural expectation and can develop atractions without it so can Sapphic women.
Woops typo: I wish I was more androsexual. Gay men don’t have this cultural expectation and can develop atractions without it, so can Sapphic women.
It’s one of those things where it bugs me, but I understand why that assumption is often made.
It’s another case of assholes making life harder for everyone else. The best option is to ignore it, be a decent human being, and trust them to work it out as they get to know you.
And honestly, if they use that assumption to dismiss you out of hand, you might not want to be friends with them anyway…
It doesn’t happen very often but when it happens it;s not really so simple and it’s more nuanced than someone just dismissing you out of hand. So you have to notice it and correct theitr misconceoption or you’ll allow a nice online friendship to distort and miscomunicate.
I don’t know how many times I have to read an article that gives really sound advice like Jens, that’s so very gender polarised before I say well actually this is nothing like my particular subgender. It’s sound advice but comunicated in a very negative way that means a real self absorbed douchbag would read no further than thoser words.
…That’s not what my post said at all. Go back and reread it.
I didn’t say that’s what it’s about I’m saying it’s very negatively written in a gender polarized way and so alienates alot of people it’s intended to reach.
Which is a shame because what you are taliking about is really good advice.
and I share your view but not your frustrrations as I lok male even though I’m not cisgendered. This sticker is quite a good persuader http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll9/jakeypooywoos/feminism.jpg
Just seen “On being a feminist boy” Brilliant! :)
Blissed, I’m going to guess you’ve not hung out with a lot of gay men. Because, yes, they totally do have that same problem, where they assume any guy who is nice to them is trying to get in their pants. The assumption is totally there.
Take it from a former FagHag.
True, I know alot more Sapphic women than gay men.
TYhough these are all just labels of convenience really and very general.
“A week or so after the disastrous conference call, Jeannie Marie traveled to La Russell with a friend who’d heard about places like New Beginnings—sketchy teen homes drawn by Missouri’s laissez-faire policy toward faith-based residential facilities. Authorities in the state are barred from inspecting the homes or even keeping track of them. ” — How unsurprising. Institutionalized bullying with the state doing its best to look away all because they don’t want to offend religion. And people wonder why the secular population feel the need to keep speaking up.
Whoever wrote that piece on Blag Hag just comes off as a total idiot. Can I ask as to why this is even posted here?
I don’t know about looks per sé, but I have noticed on OKcupid, that a disproportionate number of high-percentage matches come from The Netherlands and not from the Flemmish part of Belgium (like at a rate of 4 to 1 or more). I’m assuming this is not because I lack anything incommon with women from Belgium, but rather the fact there’s far fewer Belgian women on there (early adopter syndrome?)
I haven’t really noticed a difference in “pretty-ness” though.
My guess with regards to the guy Jen’s article referenced, is that women in Sydney didn’t realise right away that he was a douche (perhaps because he was on vacation and that improved his overall mood/demeanor?)