Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Recent Posts
1
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Last post by LP -
Quote from: Thryleon – on
Was the article peer reviewed?  :P
Very funny. ;D

But more seriously, in case someone thinks you made a valid point, editorials are not peer reviewed because they are opinion and commentary, they can be debated but that is not peer review. If an editorial references scientific papers, then those reference papers should be peer reviewed, commenting on papers that are yet to be reviewed is like commenting on a mirage.

Scientific papers that contain hypothesis, theory and scientific finding are peer reviewed because they are meant to contain testable claims. Many good quality papers typically offer ways to put the hypothesis to the test, and very rarely if ever do they make claims of certainty.

When an alleged scientific paper makes claims that aren't testable you know it's probably bogus. Like fool who told the world MMR vaccine caused Down Syndrome, what a jerk, can you think of others? The scientific papers in response made testable claims that the MMR vaccine was safe, they didn't argue the jerks false claims because it's impossible to prove a negative, they just let you infer from the testable evidence that the jerk was a jerk.

Scientific papers might never offer certainty about the subject matter, but they often rule out assertions that obviously cannot be true.
3
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Last post by LP -
Quote from: PaulP – on
https://theconversation.com/the-peer-review-system-is-breaking-down-heres-how-we-can-fix-it-275317
I don't know about the validity of the various fixes being proposed, but the headlines claiming peer review is diminished are true for a variety of reasons.

What's not true are the claims that science is broken because peer review is broken.

The real situation is that peer review is actively under attack by those trying to assert that science is broken, they frame science like a religion. But science has no component of faith. Those with influence are using restriction of funding to try and influence or restrict peer review and careers, to the point people are reluctant to review because of retribution.
4
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments
Last post by LP -
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Thats part of what I said, yep its all Democratic but thats not what Shawny was arguing imho, Allan didnt enter the election as Premier and as I suggested a lot of voters often vote for the personalities/leaders rather than knowing too much about the policies.
If Andrews had lost his seat, we'd have a Premier nobody voted for because nobody votes for the Premier, regardless of which party forms power.

An interpretation of the wider meaning of a debate is fine, but it doesn't mean those getting involved can't be free to highlight factual errors. Taking offense isn't a defence for being called out for posting stuff that is blatantly incorrect, and the poster is not a victim of bullying or under a personal attack, such claims are just diversionary, an attempt to avoid debate.

If people do not debate stuff, it usually means they have no opinion, or no basis for an informed opinion, not that the point being ignored is right or wrong, non-debate is a neutral stance. It's completely counterfactual for some to claim that a point ignored is proof of validity.

Further, on the issue of the state politics, it's fine to talk about the mistakes, mismanagement and morality, but stick to the facts which are more than enough to debate without slathering it in a veneer of bullsh1t! As Paul Keating would say, there is no need to paint the turd, it's clearly already an obvious turd!
5
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments
Last post by DJC -
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Thats part of what I said, yep its all Democratic but thats not what Shawny was arguing imho, Allan didnt enter the election as Premier and as I suggested a lot of voters often vote for the personalities/leaders rather than knowing too much about the policies.
 For all Andrews failings as Premier of which there were many, varied and sordid he was an excellent political tactician and salesman and while Labor still would have bolted in to win the election, Labor voters got something different than what they voted for with Allan steering the ship after Andrews did his job and made sure they were re-elected.

Five out of the last ten Victorian Premiers became Premier without leading their party to an election. It's a common, routine practice that was even more common before Henry Bolte took a stranglehold on the job.  It's fairly regular at Commonwealth level too with at least a dozen PMs taking on the office of PM without leading their party to an election. The most recent are Fraser, Keating, Gillard, Rudd, Turnbull and Morrison.

Shawny can take heart from the fact the previous four Victorian Premiers who became Premier without leading their party to an election lost the next election.
7
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments
Last post by ElwoodBlues1 -
Quote from: DJC – on
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Jacinta Allan was democratically elected to Parliament as the member for Bendigo East but became Premier as she was chosen unopposed as Leader of the Labor Party after Andrews stepped down. She wasnt elected as Premier Elect initially which I think is the point Shawny was trying to make.

Once again, all State or Commonwealth leader are elected/appointed by their parties.  That's the Westminster democratic process in accordance with all Australian constitutions and conventions.  Jess Wilson was elected Leader of the Opposition by the Parliamentary Liberal Party, not the Victorian electorate.  That doesn't mean that she's not the democratically elected Leader of the Opposition.

Of course, the Greens take their leadership one step further and all party members get to vote for the leader.

There's plenty to criticise about Jacinta Allan without falsely claiming that she's not the democratically elected premier.
Thats part of what I said, yep its all Democratic but thats not what Shawny was arguing imho, Allan didnt enter the election as Premier and as I suggested a lot of voters often vote for the personalities/leaders rather than knowing too much about the policies.
 For all Andrews failings as Premier of which there were many, varied and sordid he was an excellent political tactician and salesman and while Labor still would have bolted in to win the election, Labor voters got something different than what they voted for with Allan steering the ship after Andrews did his job and made sure they were re-elected.
8
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments
Last post by DJC -
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: DJC – on


Off topic posts are the bane of a moderator's existence Shawny, but I'll let that one slide   :)

Isn't that an off topic post!

.....and this one.  :P

This one is too!

As you know Kruddler, the odd off topic post or two are fine, and can often help make a point or enliven a discussion.  It becomes a problem when the off topic posts take over the thread  :)
9
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: Shawny’s concerns about Victorian and Australian Governments
Last post by kruddler -
Quote from: DJC – on
Quote from: shawny – on
How many pages are we up to for the 'Red Trump' who runs a country on the other side of the world?  :-X Sorry DJC i know you get quite annoyed at any reference of the man but the irony is too much to ignore.

Off topic posts are the bane of a moderator's existence Shawny, but I'll let that one slide   :)

Isn't that an off topic post!

.....and this one.  :P