:yes-hahaha-yes-l:

:sicko-hexbear:

Otherwise gee fucking idiots I guess you realy needed a whole research department to figure things out like

•Alt-Right supergroup activity remains near its all-time high. This activity has been high since the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago in August (Fig. 1).

•The forums with the greatest use of Violent/Aggressive discourse in November were in Health Misinformation, scoring higher than Incels/Femcels and the Extreme Right (Fig. 7).

•Reference to sex crimes was up 13% in December and was up 32% since August (Fig. 11).

:the-democrat: reading this : "Great, its all according to the plan. Carry on mrMcdoofus, keep us informed, this is very useful information, it will come in handy when we decide to do absolutely nothing for the next 2 years."

  • TreadOnMe [none/use name]
    ·
    2 years ago

    The best part about it is that the peer reviewers also won't know what any of this stuff is despite being 'experts' and thus will let it slide out the rectum of article writing.

    I know I shouldn't really talk about this but I almost got kicked off my school's undergrad peer review council for rejecting too many papers because I had the audacity to actually check and read their source material which, hey surprise, more often than not didn't say what they said it said, or even contradicted what they said. I think one of the last straws when they told me to knock it off was when I had remembered reading an article that was basically the same research project, published a month before the paper was written, but was uncited by the paper as a contradictory study, despite complete relevance.

    They were like 'they don't have to have every journal article possible in there' and I was like 'come on they didn't even bother to check for recent background studies, who knows what other older ones they missed, they probably didn't even consult a librarian.' After that I just decided, fuck it, if they don't care, I won't care either.