this... sounds like peer review working as intended?https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1058091050261233664 …
what's to stop me from saying "oh, those linguistics papers I wrote were intentionally stupid, it was all a hoax, linguistics disproven"
-
-
it seems like the only part that's doing any work is the "obvious nonsense by any external standard". but the real papers are also that
-
they would have to be, because you have written real papers! so why bother? why not just point at the already-existing obvious nonsense?
-
if I think math is dumb, should I learn to write math papers and contribute to the literature? just post a blog mocking "imaginary numbers".
-
The difference is you can't get a math paper published by learning to imitate the way a mathematician talks
-
I mean, if you imitated it well enough you definitely could.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.