Submitted 9 months ago by lemmur@szmer.info to science_memes@mander.xyz
I first went about the humane capture of the wildlife of C-100. A few peacocks were caught with bear traps, an iguana was captured via a falling piano, and a peacock bass was shot in the face with a shotgun, all in line with the standards set by the Florida Constitution [3].
Truly gold.
So this is obviously satire but reading this it just sounded way too close to current reality for comfort.
I know that parts of the document are acme levels over the top but other parts sincerely read as if written by your average Maga idiot
Poe’s Law.
I was tired of being a Darwinist. Now I follow the writings of Dickens; I’m a Dickhead.
Clicked thinking it was legit. Good find OP!
Thanks!
Only a few bites because people, understandably, aren’t biting that headline.
Share a screenshot of the article instead and they’ll be all over it.
At first I thought it was satire, but when I saw the writer had the scientific Pokédex entries I knew it was legit
The inclusion of Pokédex Entry numbers is great.
Also, I like the sources cited for the paper. One of them is "Pigeon-Elephant Theory: the real origin of humans – Journal of Astrological Big Data Ecology by B McGraw"
Is there money in writing crap “research” papers like this?
I would be fine doing this under a pseudonym. But I know UFO researchers really have to hustle a ton. So maybe not?
People also do this to take the piss out of a junk journal. Usually ones that let anything through
I have no idea, but I am guessing the religious right pays handsomely for anything “scientific” which supports their absolutely asinine beliefs.
This evidence is certainly in contrast to those who believe, based on the writings of Charles Dickens alone
🤣 this writer is genius
I read through that entire thing, saw Charles, and just skipped right over it. That’s perfect though.
How soon before someone is citing this article as evidence? 😩
Referencing this parody as if it’s a serious study should be ground the rejection or rétraction.
I wonder if journals and reviewers have tools to help detect fake and/or retracted study in references. Some already screen for the phrase “vegetative electron microscopy”.
The earth is only 6001 years old [1]!
😩
You got me. This one is too good.
We’re expected to believe that the peacocks personally recounted their lineage? In English? I feel like the author is just making things up at that point.
Well after these peacocks were crushed by a piano, they might have been unable to recount anything at all.
I dunno, but I feel like the author might have taken some creative liberties here…
Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 9 months ago
Take that creationists, 6001 proves God couldn’t have done it