|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 26, 2024 10:11:04 GMT
modernity.news/2024/02/17/leading-scientific-journal-publishes-fake-ai-generated-paper-about-rat-with-giant-penis/"A leading scientific journal faces humiliation after it published a completely fake paper, purportedly written by Chinese researchers, which contained AI generated images of a rat with a penis bigger than its own body. The Telegraph reports that the journal Frontiers in Cell and Development Biology published a paper that claimed to show the signalling pathway of sperm stem cells, but depicted a rat sitting upright with a massive dick and four giant testicles. The illustration was reportedly created by using Midjourney, the AI imaging tool, which added labels to the ridiculous diagram using terms that don’t exist, including “dissilced”, “testtomcels” and “senctolic”. Another ludicrous image to the right of the rat displays “sterrn cells” in a Petri dish being spooned out." This does raise questions as the effectiveness of peer review the much vaunted checking process demanded by the alarmists on AGW issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 26, 2024 11:19:33 GMT
Apparently such fakery is reaching epidemic proportions.
All part and parcel of a general collapse of our institutions
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2024 14:26:48 GMT
Good find, Sandy. I laughed so much.
To think that we are taking notice of people who are making these sorts of obvious errors.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cartertonian on Feb 26, 2024 19:08:15 GMT
The Telegraph should be approaching the peer reviewers for comment. I peer-review journal articles, most recently being one for the Journal of Nutritional Science, and I take the responsibility seriously. I can't see how this got through the peer-review process unless that too is as flawed as the article itself.  |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Feb 26, 2024 19:22:46 GMT
I suspect it was peer reviewed over a few pints.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 28, 2024 18:48:00 GMT
I have a video of a researcher of social science here, which gives you a forensic account of how social science papers are fraudulent, and it includes a real life example of one top professor who posted a little clue regarding his nefarious activities in a blog post on social media. One has to laugh that a top professor in social science would make such a schoolboy mistake on social media, underlying the irony of it.
By the way, going back to the original post about the rat, I read the following:
Now bear in mind how hard he thinks this job is and then note the article also states:
So why is a professor of Cambridge lying?
This is where we need to do a little research of our own.
The journal which fucked up states in the 'about us' section of the website:
So there you have it. A lying bastard from one of our two top universities carrying the can for some stupid bitch they made professor over in our other top university who seems to think you can run a journal without scientific peer review. It is a disgrace.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Mar 13, 2024 10:58:32 GMT
Great find, Sandy.
This whole story sounds made up to me … all elements of it are pretty unbelievable and hilarious! … it smells as fishy as that U.S. Navy tic tac UFO video.🙄
A comic out to destroy the reputation of the peer-review process? … or poke fun at the integrity of the Western Scientific Establishment? … that needs better checks, safeguards and removing from Western Religious/Deep State control tbh.
…This is classic April 1st material … but under current Western Administration … every day delivers us to Comedy Central.
Prof Amanda Gay Fisher ?? … is that a real person? … or made up name? … like Prof S. Toophrawd
This isn’t a very subtle AI ‘fake’ …. Chat LGTBQ+Pronouns 4 and fun students likely did this …
… peer-reviewed? … nah! …. Infinite Monkey Cage-reviewed … Prof. Brian Cox territory.
*******************
If this is REAL.
The good news from all this … the Pro Boards Forum Administrators can no longer insist … all comments on the science around Covid 19 be “peer-reviewed”😂👍
… now the process has been exposed as being almost as flakey as most ‘Fact-Checker sites’ run and funded by the 🤡’s in manipulative quangos.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Mar 13, 2024 11:17:27 GMT
The notorious 'Grievance Studies' affair. e.g.: "...An Ethnography of Breastaurant Masculinity: Themes of Objectification, Sexual Conquest, Male Control, and Masculine Toughness in a Sexually Objectifying Restaurant. Sex Roles 79, 762 (2018)" Includes a re-worded chapter from Mein Kampf |
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Mar 16, 2024 8:17:32 GMT
The notorious 'Grievance Studies' affair. e.g.: "...An Ethnography of Breastaurant Masculinity: Themes of Objectification, Sexual Conquest, Male Control, and Masculine Toughness in a Sexually Objectifying Restaurant. Sex Roles 79, 762 (2018)" Includes a re-worded chapter from Mein KampfOne would have thought that this ‘hoax’ would have totally shaken the Social Humanity ‘industry’ to the core back in 2018 … and the Universities of the World would have rung alarm bells on ‘grievance’ agenda politics … and done a complete ‘u-turn’ …. but alas … even Oxford University has shoe-horned in a women chancellor who signs up wholesale to this cringing ‘programming’. …. It’s baffling that those that control our Media seem to have cranked up to deliver more of this manipulative Humanities guff that pushes Society and Industry away from more important matters … being cohesive, efficient and productive in harmony with Nature. … instead Western Society becomes bogged down in divisive practices that stir up v.expensive economy draining anarchy and rioting in the streets in efforts to manipulate elections. Has Humanities today been just reduced to power politics … instead of quiet effective change at the grass roots? |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 16, 2024 8:28:18 GMT
Is any of this a surprise? The peer review process simply means review by person or persons with the same programming, beliefs and prejudices as the original publisher.
It's like asking a group of devout Muslims to peer review the Koran and they all agree it's the truth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Mar 16, 2024 8:29:05 GMT
Michael Nayna’s intro video on Dan’s v. interesting ‘Grievance Studies Affair’ piece
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Mar 16, 2024 14:17:50 GMT
Peer reviewing can be quite a big task and it doesn't pay very well - if at all. You can pay people to give you a favourable review nowadays anyway. You can get anything on the net. That's why there's so much junk science around. And of course the Climate change disinformation isn't peer reviewed at all.
A few years ago I wanted to move my pension but the pension provider wouldn't allow me to do so without getting a full review of the pension, which would cost several thousand quid. So I got an internet pension company to give me a review of the pension and advising me not to move it, which they were willing to do for £250. So that fulfilled the requirement to get a review and I moved the pension. But the company obviously had no liability for my actions because I did the opposite of what they said. You can find people to subvert any process on the net.
|
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 16, 2024 14:42:29 GMT
I wonder how many deaths will ultimately be attributed to Andrew Wakefield's 1998 fraud in The Lancet, which should have been peer-reviewed, and his subsequent anti-vaccination activities...
|
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Mar 18, 2024 20:25:11 GMT
I wonder how many deaths will ultimately be attributed to Andrew Wakefield's 1998 fraud in The Lancet, which should have been peer-reviewed, and his subsequent anti-vaccination activities... Most likely none … Read your Wikipedia … P1 “There is no effective vaccine for the Common Cold Class of viruses … inc Covid 19 - because they all mutate extremely fast”. Basic science … If it delivered any protection … it was fleeting and pretty damaging … because it distracted the immune systems of the vaccinated … to the point many vax victims can’t fight off even basic flu effectively these days. Most jabbed vaxxed human pin cushions today in my street are tired, weak and ineffective at work … throwing a sickie every 5 mins. … Bloody useless …. if myocarditis doesn’t claim them, fatigue and alcoholism will! 🤔😋 Let the stupid nasty gullible b———-ds rot and ☠️ … they deserve it!🤣👏 |
|
