By Jay Baker
Satirizing, distorting, excusing, misleading and defrauding the most peer-reviewed, murderous, ridiculous, deceptive and non-existent fakeries in the week’s fake news.
Phony studies reveal research scientists are thin-skinned
That “peer-reviewed” scientific study you read about in the news might be phony. But if it is, real “scientists” would rather not know about it.
It was just last summer that the National Association of Scholars published a report titled “The Irreproducibility of Modern Science: Causes, Consequences and the Road to Reform,” that focused on how a large number of published scientific studies could not be replicated, meaning they were incomplete if not outright fakeries. Unsurprisingly for those of us capable of using our brains, the worst among them were in the area of climate science.
Last September, a philosopher at Portland State University dropped a bomb on academia responsible for producing the “peer-reviewed” nonsense posing as “science” when he admitted that he had co-authored 20 bogus articles, mostly related to gender and queer studies, and submitted them under a pseudonym to mainstream scientific journals to see if they would be published. As the Wall Street Journal reports, the articles included absurd language and reached ridiculous conclusions. But only six of his satirical articles were rejected. Seven were accepted, and the rest were determined to be publishable but needing revision.
The titles and subject matter of Peter Boghossian’s satirical “science” were so absurd that only the over-educated pointy heads in academia could possibly fall for them. As Pacific Standard magazine (PSmag) notes, one study, titled “Human Reaction to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity at Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon,” found its way into a prominent journal titled, Gender, Place, and Culture. It posited that dogs might suffer oppression based upon (perceived) gender.
Another, titled “Rubbing One Out: Defining Metasexual Violence of Objectification Through Nonconsensual Masturbation,” aimed to “situate non-consensual male autoerotic fantasizing about women as a form of metasexual violence that depersonalizes her” and “injures her being on an affective level.” I’m not at all sure what that means. As PSmag explained it, “jargon and nonsense comprised the essence of Boghossian et al.’s satire.” That sounds about right.
Another of his collaborations was picked up by Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work. It was titled, “Our Struggle Is My Struggle,” and consisted in part of a chapter from Hitler’s Mein Kompf with feminist buzzwords replacing Hitler’s anti-Semitism, according to the Wall Street Journal.
But Boghossian’s employer failed to see his humor. The university formed a committee to investigate whether Boghossian should be investigated for “research misconduct.” In December he was sanctioned for conducting research on “human subjects” without submitting his research protocol to the university’s Institutional Review Board for review as required by the federal National Research Act of 1974. The “human subjects,” in this case, being the large-brained ninnymuggins who lapped up his phony science.
In other words, rather than being concerned that scientific research was vulnerable to being defrauded by the simplest and most ridiculous “studies” imaginable, the university is intent on persecuting the man who exposed them.
The reason people don’t trust MSM reporters
While it’s true that President Donald Trump is prone to hyperbole and even making statements that have only a tenuous hold on the truth — especially when he goes off script in rally speeches that descend in tossed word-salad mumbo jumbo — reporters are no better; and are often much worse. Hence the rationale behind this column.
Still they wonder why Trump calls them the enemy of the people and their popularity rating hovers somewhere between cockroaches and bedbugs. Well, here’s one of many reasons.
During his El Paso rally speech Monday night, Trump went after black face-wearing Virginia Governor Ralph Northram over his recent comments on an abortion bill that was making its way through the Virginia assembly.
Said Trump:
But the governor stated that he would even allow a newborn baby to come out into the world and wrap the baby and make the baby comfortable, and then talk to the mother, and talk to the father, and then execute the baby. Execute the baby.
In response, Vox reporter Aaron Rupar tweeted an expletive and followed it with, “Trump falsely accuses Ralph Northam of saying he supports “a newborn baby [coming] out into the world, and wrap the baby, make the baby comfortable, & then talk to the mother & talk to the father and then execute the baby. Execute the baby!”
Caitlin Gibson, reporterette for The (fake news) Washington Post chimed in to Rupar’s tweet with, “This is the kind of like that incites violence.”
Of course, there’s nothing violent about murdering babies, but I digress.
The trouble for Rupar and Gibson is that it is they who are lying, not Trump. Here’s what Northam said a couple of days before he was outed as having previously donned black face and posed for photographs that appeared on his page in his medical school yearbook:
No matter how Northam and the pro-baby-murder crowd wants to parse it, Northam was suggesting that babies that had been born could be murdered. There is no need to keep a dead baby comfortable, and if the baby had been resuscitated it wouldn’t be dead. That’s the baby that Northam said would be the topic of discussion between the physician and the mother.
Of course, the tweet by fake news “journalist” Rupar stormed across the internet, spread by the anti-Trump crowd. It’s a lie that has continued to be spread by mainstream “journalists” since Trump’s Monday night speech.
Another reason people don’t trust the MSM
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the delightfully dimwitted and economics-challenged communist from New York who is turning out the inner commie inherent in the Democrat Party, released her ballyhooed New Green Deal resolution this week to much fanfare from the left and much ridicule from the right.
The 10-year plan calls for remodeling or replacing every building in America, eliminating fossil fuels, airplanes and nuclear power, eliminating meat from America’s diet and host of other nonsensical, pie-in-the-sky, rainbow and unicorn utopian progressive fantasies. After the accompanying FAQ (frequently asked question) document was roundly mocked for, among other things, calling for an end to cow farts and giving “wages” to people unwilling to work, Ocasio-Cortez pulled the document from her congressional website.
According to The Daily Caller, Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, said his office mistakenly published a gaffe-riddled FAQ that didn’t match the Green New Deal’s legislative text. Chakrabarti, however, also claimed a “doctored” FAQ circulating around the internet.
TDC also reports that the lefty site Media Matters echoed the false claim of a “doctored” version, and Ocasio-Cortez adviser Robert Hockett, a professor at Cornell, told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson that the protections for people “unwilling to work” came from a doctored document.
None of that is true.
The fact checkers at WaPo jumped into the fray in an effort to get to the “truth” of the matter. What it found was that the Ocasio-Cortez camp’s claims of a “doctored” document were misleading but did not rate any Pinocchios. WaPo also determined that since the cow farts, wages for unwilling workers and elimination of airplanes aren’t definitively laid out in the resolution and only appeared in a FAQ that has since been pulled, it wouldn’t be giving “any Pinocchios in this kerfuffle.”
Imagine Trump getting the same courtesy for one of his “misleading” claims.
More WaPo anti-Trump propaganda
Here’s a headline from The Washington Post Wednesday: “President Trump installed a room-sized golf simulator at White House.”
Here’s a tweet from a WaPo reporter about the story:
In the past several weeks, Trump hasn’t played as much golf as he’s used to – but not to worry since he’s installed a “room-sized” golf simulator at WH. The cost: $50K. Meanwhile, executive time consists of 60% of his schedule https://t.co/ARZf3N5z5t
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) February 13, 2019
The implication is that the bad old Orange Man Trump is wasting “taxpayer” dollars and important time playing virtual golfing games in the White House instead of doing important work. The tweet by WaPo’s Manu Raju was retweeted 1,479 times (and there’s no telling how many times the retweet was retweeted) and received 2,471 likes.
The story was picked up by the MSM and run with any number of misleading headlines, most of which were highlighting Trump and the $50,000 (as if $50,000 is a significant expenditure in a government with a deficit of $984 billion) he spent on it, but nothing else.
The actual story was likely read by a minuscule number of those retweeting and liking it. So, most people didn’t learn that the system Trump installed was paid for out of Trump’s own pocket and it replaced an older, less sophisticated golf simulator installed by Barack Obama — a system WaPo didn’t bother to cover when Obama installed it — and Trump is yet to have used it.
Facebook or Fakebook?
A report published in late January by the independent research group PlainSite highlights some disturbing news for Mark Zuckerberg and Fakebook Facebook. Researchers have determined that half or more Facebook accounts are fake, and that Zukckerberg and others with the company know they are fake. That means that the company has been defrauding investors and advertisers.
As Zerohedge.com reports, according to PlainSite, Facebook’s phony numbers hurt advertisers in a number of ways:
- Its customers purchase advertising on Facebook based on the fact that it can supposedly target advertisements at more than 2 billion real human beings. To the extent that users aren’t real, companies are throwing their money down the drain.
- Fake accounts click on advertising at random, or “like” pages, to throw off antifraud algorithms. Fake accounts look real if they do not follow a clear pattern. This kind of activity defrauds advertisers, but rewards Facebook with revenue.
- Fake accounts often defraud other users on Facebook, through scams, fake news, extortion and other forms of deception. Often, they can involve governments.
