Should men be taller than their girlfriend?

Some Random Guy said:
I just don't think me not understanding something is a good reason not to do it, I'm sure it's suitable for the intended audience.

Totally agree to a certain extent. You could have a paper that looks at shows causes of hair loss that finds a slight correlation between cat ownership and mail pattern baldness in a small group study. By the time it goes from journals, to papers, to Facebook, it looks very different.

It wouldn't surprise me it @CatRyan's comment about lads never being shorter than their mothers started through something simular.
Click to expand...

Better science education is the answer. Not restricting access for the people who paid for the research.
 


Men should never be so tall that they feet don’t reach the ground; the implications for the carpeting and flooring industry would be profound. Also, they would be difficult to track.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
@Lewberry pie has a good point though. There have been discussions/articles in recent years about the validity of peer reviews. There are biases that occur with regards of subject, author, and trends of "current thought" have influence on what can be considered valid/true work is the argument.
Click to expand...

Consider an instance where the underlying data in the paper is flawed. Which has often been the case in Psychology, it would seem.

How does a Professor who is already stretched over research, teaching and admin duties have the time to thoroughly go over that underlying data and check its veracity? Bearing in mind they’re not being paid for it. That’s if the journal actually requests it from the author in the first place.

What if it gets handed over to a student of the Professor as a training exercise (very common) without the Professor checking their review (happens)?

Then there’s the almost comical incidents you hear about where the reviewers comments read “You have failed to understand the work of x and y, and the comparisons you draw are therefore flawed.” Not realising that the person whose work they’re reviewing is the author they’re discussing :lol:
 
Charmless Man said:
Consider an instance where the underlying data in the paper is flawed. Which has often been the case in Psychology, it would seem.

How does a Professor who is already stretched over research, teaching and admin duties have the time to thoroughly go over that underlying data and check its veracity? Bearing in mind they’re not being paid for it. That’s if the journal actually requests it from the author in the first place.

What if it gets handed over to a student of the Professor as a training exercise (very common) without the Professor checking their review (happens)?

Then there’s the almost comical incidents you hear about where the reviewers comments read “You have failed to understand the work of x and y, and the comparisons you draw are therefore flawed.” Not realising that the person whose work they’re reviewing is the author they’re discussing :lol:
Click to expand...
:lol:

Great points, by the way.
 
What was that cobblers about all men being taller than their mams?
My brother never grew as a tall as my mam.
(Me and my other brother outgrew her).

Definitely all of us had the same parents so no funny business.
 
George Kaplan said:
Men should never be so tall that they feet don’t reach the ground; the implications for the carpeting and flooring industry would be profound. Also, they would be difficult to track.
Click to expand...

my father used to tell me to pick things up for him because my feet were closer to the floor than his
 

Back
Top