What is the opposite of diversity? University.

[Traitorfish]

Is Classical Hero is actually saying that this is an issue of pluralism, or he is trying to turn liberal rhetoric against itself? It's getting harder and harder to tell what proportion of his posts is ham-fisted irony and what's just plain cognitive dissonance.

 

[Azale]

What's the opposite of ham-fisted? Spam-fisted.

 

[Hygro]

Is Classical Hero is actually saying that this is an issue of pluralism, or he is trying to turn liberal rhetoric against itself? It's getting harder and harder to tell what proportion of his posts is ham-fisted irony and what's just plain cognitive dissonance.

It's funny because you're doing the meta reverse.

 

[Agent327]

I could think of so many infraction-worthy answers to that.

't Was a rhetorical question. (If you don't know the answer, you're not a gentleman.)

Dunno. How far back do you want to go? The opposite of a gentilhomme is a villein, I think.

Close enough.

 

[plarq]

I recalled a story about a Ph.D in biology in Ohio has his Ph.D thesis advocating Creationism (Intelligence Design).

 

[Antilogic]

And then after a heated 341 post discussion it was realized that Classical Hero never returned to his own thread.

/thread

 

[sophie]

And then after a heated 341 post discussion it was realized that Classical Hero never returned to his own thread.

Heh. Rec'd

 

[Hygro]

haha I'm not even the first to make that joke

 

[classical_hero]

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2015/may/15/how-conservatives-lost-the-plot-over-the-rejection-of-bjorn-lomborg

Conservatives and climate science deniers desperately want to make a martyr out of Lomborg, claiming he has been the victim of zealotry and a mob of raging climate campaigners.

What really happened is that too many academics found Lomborg’s methods wanting and his historic views on climate change to be offensive.

I just love the last bit, it is just a perfect example of many academics today. But here is one evidence that he uses to try and disprove Lomborg, which is actually laughable.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2014/nov/13/g20-reality-bites-for-coal-and-climate-change

But here’s the real kicker.

The IEA says its scenario for Africa is “broadly consistent” with global warming of between 3C and 6C for the continent by the end of this century with a wide array of dangerous and some might argue catastrophic impacts (some of which the IPCC says the continent would be powerless to adapt to).

What seems clear then is that the International Energy Agency’s “new policies scenario” is not particularly appetising for Africa.

That is in spite of the fact that so far this century there has been very little warming to speak of and not even close to the lower limit if we start from the start of the century, which is being very generous indeed. But we are starting to see many Universities in the West decline, but in any case the centre wasn't about climate change and yet that is what the academics made it about.

Link to video.
"I fail anyone who disagrees with me." That is the modern university system right there.

 

[plarq]

http://www.rapiddiffusion.com/science/crackpots-bane-science/

Science as we know it has existed for about 200 years. It was in the 19th century that science gradually became professionalized. Before then, scientists were usually people who had the leisure to devote their time to scientific inquiry, but in the 19th century this changed. Scientists started to be able to live off of their scientific works, and they closed their ranks, distinguishing themselves from those whom they did not consider real scientists. They formed societies and associations, formalized the requirements for being a scientist and carved out careers for themselves.

Science is not based upon authority, but upon reason; any idea or paradigm, no matter how strongly established, must be overturned if reality is found to contradict it. The scientist is therefore uncomfortable in telling anyone, “I’m an expert; just trust me.” But ultimately, there is no choice; no one can grasp the entirety of science, and a lot of scientific details cannot be conveyed very well to a larger audience. The skeptic outsider should tread carefully. Mr. Fekete, the crackpot I started with, calls Albert Einstein a pseudo-scientist in today’s e-mail. While even the greatest names in science are no guarantee, that just reeks of a lack of reality checking and nuance.

It would be amazingly productive if all scientific knowledge could be easily passed on to anyone who was interested, but this is not realistic. The more everyone can be educated about science, the better! However, sometimes scientists and their expertise should just be trusted.

 

[Antilogic]

haha I'm not even the first to make that joke

It was the presentation that counted.

"I fail anyone who disagrees with me." That is the modern university system right there.

That's basically the comedy movie version of the university. And you can't believe everything you see at the movies.

 

[plarq]

That's basically the comedy movie version of the university. And you can't believe everything you see at the movies.

If you disagree with 1+1=2, you fail grade 1 math; if you disagree with AB!=BA, you fail linear algebra.

 

[Antilogic]

If you disagree with 1+1=2, you fail grade 1 math; if you disagree with AB!=BA, you fail linear algebra.

We both know that's not what CH meant.

 

[Leoreth]

We both know that's not what CH meant.

I'm never sure what CH means.

But on that subject, on my math faculty someone always kept putting out flyers arguing for "math reform", mostly focusing on changing algebraic rules so that multiplication of two negative number yields a negative number. I thought it was satire at first, but when I decided to follow their links it turned out to be apparently sincere.

 

[plarq]

We both know that's not what CH meant.

But in fact the "academic tyranny" is 1+1=2, you disagree and you fail.

edit: @Leoreth, Poe's law at work!

 

[bhavv]

The opposite of gentlemen is roughmen.

And 1+1= a window.

 

[Antilogic]

But on that subject, on my math faculty someone always kept putting out flyers arguing for "math reform", mostly focusing on changing algebraic rules so that multiplication of two negative number yields a negative number. I thought it was satire at first, but when I decided to follow their links it turned out to be apparently sincere.

Once a number gets negative it stays negative. #mathdepression

 

[Thorvald of Lym]

If you disagree with 1+1=2, you fail grade 1 math; if you disagree with AB!=BA, you fail linear algebra.

Ah, but you see, 1+1=3 because Catholics don't believe in contraception.

 

[plarq]

Ah, but you see, 1+1=3 because Catholics don't believe in contraception.

At this rate, 1+1=4 or more if you have twins or triplet or more kids in one labor...

Also, here I present the Islamic math, 1+4=????

 

[gay_Aleks]

At this rate, 1+1=4 or more if you have twins or triplet or more kids in one labor...

Also, here I present the Islamic math, 1+4=????

1+4=not a multimillionaire anymore