2019-nCoV

The sad thing is this woman will never be capable enough to understand why she's part of the problem. The last two sentences is her pushing away all blame

"Jacquelyn Gill, an associate professor at the University of Maine’s Climate Change Institute, tweeted that “my friend @sciencing_bi passed away yesterday from complications from covid-19, after a brutal 4-month recovery period. She was not expendable. She was not an acceptable cost of doing business.” Gill later tweeted, after learning of “irregularities,” that she had never met the person behind the account in person and that she became convinced the account was a hoax. “I’m now convinced @Sciencing_Bi was a fake account,” Gill tweeted. “I’m so sorry to those of you whose trust was violated.Creating a fake pseudonymous account and pretending various marginalized identities is wrong. It’s evil.” "

The goal of the account was 100% accomplished with these reactions.
 
Last edited:
Fool said:
A Queer Indigenous Professor Who Died of COVID-19 Didn't Actually Exist | Vice
Click to expand...

Might have been these folks - remember?

A Massive Hoax Involving 20 Fake Culture Studies Papers Just Exploded in Academia

A Massive Hoax Involving 20 Fake Culture Studies Papers Just Exploded in Academia
MIKE MCRAE
4 OCTOBER 2018

Stop me if you've heard this one before: a physicist, a philosopher, and a medievalist got together and decided to hoax cultural studies journals with a score of fake research papers.

The story is familiar, but this time the joke is far bigger. Their intention was to expose the shoddy standards that count for publishing in certain academic fields - but not everybody is convinced this is the solution we all need.

It's fair to say that Portland State University assistant professor of philosophy Peter Boghossian and mathematician James Lindsay aren't exactly fans of the emerging fields of cultural and identity studies.

Last year they wrote a paper on the 'conceptual penis' as a social construct and successfully saw it published in a social science journal.

The research was a complete sham, and the paper's wording reflected the convoluted, dense language they associated with the field. Its publication – the pair argued – showed these journals will accept just about anything that seems to fit.

The conceptual penis hoax was far from the first to make a statement about the lack of critical review in certain 'critical' cultural research fields.

Just over 20 years ago, New York University mathematician Alan Sokal famously had his nonsense paper Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity published in an academic journal of postmodern studies.

An occasional hoax paper here and there stirs heated debate, but Boghossian and Lindsay saw a need to cast a wider net.

Last year, the two joined forces with Helen Pluckrose, the editor-in-chief of the current affairs magazine, Areo, and "exile from the humanities", and produced what one journalist referred to as Sokal Squared.

Three intrepid academics just perpetrated a giant version of the Sokal Hoax, placing scores of fake papers in major academic journals. Call it Sokal Squared.

The result is hilarious and delightful. It also showcases a serious problem with big parts of academia.

(Thread.)
— Yascha Mounk (@Yascha_Mounk) October 3, 2018

The trio scaled-up operations to press out 20 hoax papers over a space of 10 months in parody of what they refer to as grievance studies. These were then sent to what they argued were the "best academic journals in the relevant fields".

Most of the papers were inspired by some form of progressive political ideology, such as the role of patriarchy in modern society or the influence of imperialism.

"Sometimes we just thought a nutty or inhumane idea up and ran with it," the writers explain.

"What if we write a paper saying we should train men like we do dogs – to prevent rape culture? Hence came the "Dog Park" paper."

Had they not felt a need to go public, says Pluckrose, they would have gone even further.

Of those 20 papers, seven were accepted, with four since published online. The other three might have seen light of day as well, given more time.

The remaining 13 hoax articles included seven that were still under some sort of review or consideration by the end of the hoax, with two having been resubmitted following a revision.

That left six which were thrown on the scrap heap.

The team also received four invitations to peer-review for the journals – a rather striking proposition, given their lack of credentials, and a strong indicator of why their fiction passed as rigorous research.

Few would argue that peer-review is perfect, or that some fields don't have more of a problem with their academic standards than others. The question now is how such hoaxes serve to fix what is evidently a concerning problem.

Duke University sociologist Kieran Healy agrees there's a problem with nonsense being published, but doesn't see much good in picking on single fields.

—A tremendous amount of garbage gets published regardless of method because a) It's hard to do good work, and b) There's tremendous pressure to publish. This means lots of stuff ends up in print anyway, even if it's dull, stupid, boring, or wrong. This is not a surprise. 3/n
— Kieran Healy (@kjhealy) October 3, 2018

The Replication Crisis has indeed been big news in recent years, and not just among the humanities.

Rather than shaming journals into doing better or dismissing entire fields, researchers are collaborating across disciplines, taking a hard, critical look at what's causing the problem and finding practical solutions.

To Boghossian, Pluckrose, and Lindsay, the flaw is fundamental to the studies themselves.

"The problem is epistemological, political, ideological, and ethical and it is profoundly corrupting scholarship in the social sciences and humanities," they write.

Whether such hoaxes will heal these corrupting influences, contribute to divisions that perpetuate them, or provide new avenues to improve cultural research, is yet to be seen.

Perhaps future sociologists will have the right tools to give us a sound answer.
Click to expand...
 

85 years old/er is 3.2% of US population, but 1/3 of covid deaths.
75 years old/er is 7% of US population, but 59% of covid deaths.
54 years and younger is 70% of US population, but 8% of covid deaths.

Median age of covid death is right around 78, which is the average US life expectancy.

Sauce: CDC: Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex, Age, and State.

*Keep in mind these are coded as deaths with covid, not from covid.
Click to expand...
 
Yah - and then they took the bats to "batlady" at the lab in Wuhan and tried to create bioweapons. Due to being dumbasses and not maintaining proper protocol, they let it loose.
 
mjoe said:
COVID-19 first appeared in Chinese miners in 2012: scientists
Click to expand...

these guys are behind still considering 'wet market'; running for cover; why don't ccp give us original dna of virus;
The coronavirus may not have originated at a Wuhan wet market last year but 1,000 miles away in 2012 — deep in a Chinese mineshaft where workers came down with a mysterious, pneumonia-like illness after being exposed to bats.
Click to expand...

here's where gain of function happened to original that was then released

from the Chinese medical doctor who treated the miners and sent their tissue samples to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for testing.
Click to expand...

news people are just amazed!!! wow

“The evidence it contains has led us to reconsider everything we thought we knew ...
Click to expand...

Basically this is where MSM is always at as they move on to the neck lie to distract from teh truth just long enough for them to say
ah comon' man
ofn
MOVE ON!
 
Ah Remember teh good old days of
RussiaRussiaRussia
That was some true Science! eh?
You still holding fast to those hypotheses?
 
mjoe said:
COVID-19 first appeared in Chinese miners in 2012: scientists
Click to expand...

or 2004

Identification of a new human coronavirus - PubMed

Abstract
Three human coronaviruses are known to exist: human coronavirus 229E (HCoV-229E), HCoV-OC43 and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV). Here we report the identification of a fourth human coronavirus, HCoV-NL63, using a new method of virus discovery. The virus was isolated from a 7-month-old child suffering from bronchiolitis and conjunctivitis. The complete genome sequence indicates that this virus is not a recombinant, but rather a new group 1 coronavirus. The in vitro host cell range of HCoV-NL63 is notable because it replicates on tertiary monkey kidney cells and the monkey kidney LLC-MK2 cell line. The viral genome contains distinctive features, including a unique N-terminal fragment within the spike protein. Screening of clinical specimens from individuals suffering from respiratory illness identified seven additional HCoV-NL63-infected individuals, indicating that the virus was widely spread within the human population.

Conflict of interest statement
L.v.d.H. is listed as the inventor on a European and a US patent application, held by Primagen Holding b.v., entitled “Coronavirus nucleic acid, protein, and methods for the generation of vaccine, medicaments and diagnostics.”

~novel~
 
"Molecular biology tools such as RT-PCR assays39,40 were designed to selectively detect the human coronaviruses HCoV-229E and HCoV-OC43, but these assays will not detect HCoV-NL63. Even the RT-PCR assay that was designed to amplify all known coronaviruses40 is not able to amplify HCoV-NL63 because of several mismatches with the primer sequences."

~novel testing, novelty, novel, stephen king novels, novell networking, norv turner novelty items~
 
I'm just glad I'm able to go back to eating bat soup with confidence that it's still good for my health.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top