The Gaystapo is at it again

[bodecea]

Talking MORE about gays?

Who marches in the streets for homosexuality Bode...you or me?
Who sues anyone who runs a business that won't support homosexuality Bode....you or me?

You can try as hard as you want sweetie. You're not fooling anyone.

Ok, Mary....

 

[JoeB131]

Your claim is false, of course:

Then why did you repost an article that repeated what I just said.

Joseph Smith was a Polygamist. people got pissed off about it and shot him.

 

[bripat9643]

Your claim is false, of course:

Then why did you repost an article that repeated what I just said.

Joseph Smith was a Polygamist. people got pissed off about it and shot him.

Quit lying, Joe. You claimed they killed him because he married 14-year-old girls. That was clearly not true.

The real reason is that he shut down a newspaper that was hostile to him:

Death of Joseph Smith - Wikipedia​

Joseph Smith, as mayor of the town of Nauvoo, Illinois, had ordered the destruction of the facilities producing the Nauvoo Expositor, a newly established newspaper set up by a group of non-Mormons and people who had seceded from the church. The newspaper's first (and only) issue was deeply critical of Smith and other church leaders—reporting that Smith was practicing polygamy and claiming he intended to set himself up as a theocratic king. In response, Smith declared the paper a public nuisance and ordered its press destroyed.[1]

The destruction of the press led to charges of riot against the Smith brothers and other members of the Nauvoo City Council. Warrants for his arrest were dismissed by Nauvoo courts. Joseph Smith declared martial law in Nauvoo and called on the Nauvoo Legion to protect Nauvoo. The brothers voluntarily traveled to the county seat at Carthage and surrendered to the authorities to face the charges. After surrendering, the brothers were also charged with treason against Illinois for declaring martial law. The brothers were in the Carthage jail awaiting trial when the mob attacked.​

 

[JoeB131]

Quit lying, Joe. You claimed they killed him because he married 14-year-old girls. That was clearly not true.

The real reason is that he shut down a newspaper that was hostile to him:

Hostile to him because they published stories about his polygamy with 14 year old girls!!!

Joseph Smith, as mayor of the town of Nauvoo, Illinois, had ordered the destruction of the facilities producing the Nauvoo Expositor, a newly established newspaper set up by a group of non-Mormons and people who had seceded from the church. The newspaper's first (and only) issue was deeply critical of Smith and other church leaders—reporting that Smith was practicing polygamy and claiming he intended to set himself up as a theocratic king.

 

[bripat9643]

Quit lying, Joe. You claimed they killed him because he married 14-year-old girls. That was clearly not true.

The real reason is that he shut down a newspaper that was hostile to him:

Hostile to him because they published stories about his polygamy with 14 year old girls!!!

Joseph Smith, as mayor of the town of Nauvoo, Illinois, had ordered the destruction of the facilities producing the Nauvoo Expositor, a newly established newspaper set up by a group of non-Mormons and people who had seceded from the church. The newspaper's first (and only) issue was deeply critical of Smith and other church leaders—reporting that Smith was practicing polygamy and claiming he intended to set himself up as a theocratic king.

Wiki doesn't mention the age of the wives, moron.

 

[JoeB131]

Wiki doesn't mention the age of the wives, moron.

True enough... So here's a list of the wives of Joseph Smith.

List of Joseph Smith's wives - Wikipedia

10 of these women were in their teens.

2 of them were 14.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Quit lying, Joe.

You might as well ask a pig not to wallow in mud, as ask JoeB131 not to lie.

 

[JoeB131]

You might as well ask a pig not to wallow in mud, as ask JoeB131 not to lie.

again, guy who belongs to a cult started by a con man who wanted to have sex with teenage girls.

The difference between Joseph Smith and David Koresh?

Original and Extra-Crispy!

 

[P@triot]

More Republicans should go to college. But they don't. Why is that?

The majority of Republicans say colleges are bad for America (yes, really)

Why? Because the left has completely destroyed academia in America. And it wasn’t by accident either. The left realizes they need an ignorant and dependent electorate in order to achieve - and then maintain - power.

The paper was a hoax. So were 20 other papers submitted to academic journals in the past year—seven of them accepted. Last week, Boghossian and his cohorts revealed their elaborate prank, after The Wall Street Journal raised questions about the dog-park paper.

Dr. James Lindsay exposed what the left has done to academia by submitting fake papers full of buzzwords. The papers were actually approved and published by academia. And these are the people inside of the institutions charging hundreds of thousands of dollars to “educate” your children.

A Portland State University Professor Made Up a Study of Dog-on-Dog Sexual Assault—and Got the Hoax Published

Dr. Lindsay's hoax on academia is hilarious and terrifying at the same time

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Wiki doesn't mention the age of the wives, moron.

True enough... So here's a list of the wives of Joseph Smith.

List of Joseph Smith's wives - Wikipedia

10 of these women were in their teens.

2 of them were 14.

Very normal marrying age for the time.

 

[JoeB131]

Very normal marrying age for the time.

What wasn't normal was a 35 year old man marrying a 14 year old when he was already married to 30 other women. IN fact, people we so upset about it they shot the piece of shit like the dog he was...

Unfortunately, his sick ass cult moved to Utah before they could get the rest of them.

 

[JoeB131]

Why? Because the left has completely destroyed academia in America. And it wasn’t by accident either. The left realizes they need an ignorant and dependent electorate in order to achieve - and then maintain - power.

Uh, sorry, Poodle, what screwed up Academia is capitalism and greed. Once you made it "for profit" and made it a required product if you wanted to get a better job than working at Starbucks, that's when you got all the hucksters in, the On-Line Universities where are nothing but scams, the universities engaging in an arms race as to who could build the biggest facilities.

I use my own alma mater of UIC as an example. It was started in the 1950's as an extension of U of I that city kids could commute to and afford to go to. And when I went there on a military scholarship in the 1980's, it was pretty affordable. Tuition was less than $1500 a year. which mean you could work a minimum wage job and pay your tuition working 10 hours a week

Today that same university costs $17,000 a year to go to. You'd have to work full time to afford it without a scholarship. They put dorms on campus (my niece lived in them for about a year and said they were horrible) and a big sports stadium that they have to GIVE tickets away for because nobody gives a shit about their E-list teams. Totally lost the plot.

Dr. James Lindsay exposed what the left has done to academia by submitting fake papers full of buzzwords. The papers were actually approved and published by academia. And these are the people inside of the institutions charging hundreds of thousands of dollars to “educate” your children.

Again, this isn't a new problem, Poodle. The problem here is that universities have always worked on a system of "Publish or Perish". Doesn't matter how good of a TEACHER you are, it matters to them how often you get published. Had one professor (and just so you feel better, he was a liberal) who was pretty much the equivalent of nails on a chalkboard in the classroom, but he published some books, and they thought he was awesome. They obviously never had to sit through one of his lectures.

So Academia churns out tons of papers no one reads, no one really cares about, just so they can throw them on their CV's.

The “Grievance Studies” Hoax Does Not Reveal the Academic Scandal That It Claims

Let’s analyze the hoax a bit more carefully. The team wrote up 21 bogus papers altogether. (The essay starts by saying there were only 20; according to Lindsay, that’s because two of the papers were largely similar to one another.) Of those 21, two-thirds never were accepted for publication. The Areo essay dwells on several papers that had been rejected outright, including one suggesting that white students should be enchained for the sake of pedagogy, and another proposing that self-pleasure could be a form of violence against women. They take it as a sign of intellectual decay that such papers managed to elicit respectful feedback from reviewers, even short of publication. (One of those has since explained that he was just trying to be helpful.) But I think we can all agree that it’s neither telling nor newsworthy when a bogus paper fails to get into an academic journal, however offensive or inane it might have been.

What about the seven papers that were accepted for publication? One was a collection of poetry for a journal called Poetry Therapy. Let’s be clear: This was bad poetry. (“Love is my name/ And yours a sweet death.”) But I’m not sure its acceptance sustains the claim that entire fields of academic inquiry have been infiltrated by social constructivism and a lack of scientific rigor.

Another three plants were scholarly essays. Two were boring and confusing; I think it’s fair to call them dreck. That dreck got published in academic journals, a fact worth noting to be sure. The third, a self-referential piece on the ethics of academic hoaxes, makes what strikes me as a somewhat plausible argument about the nature of satire. The fact that its authors secretly disagreed with the paper’s central claim—that they were parroting the sorts of arguments that had been made against them in the past, and with which they’ve strongly disagreed—doesn’t make those arguments a priori ridiculous. But hey, that’s just my opinion.

That leaves us with three more examples of the hoax. These were touted as the most revealing ones—the headline grabbers, the real slam dunks: the dog-rape paper, the dildo paper, the breastaurant research. They also share a common trait: Each was presented as a product of empirical research, based on original data. The dog-rape study is supposed to have resulted from nearly 1,000 hours of observation at three dog parks in southeast Portland. The dildo paper pretends to draw from multihour interviews with 13 men—eight straight, two bisexual, three gay—about their sexual behaviors. And the breastaurant research claims to have its basis in a two-year-long project carried out in northern Florida, involving men whose educational backgrounds, ages, and marital statuses were duly recorded and reported.

So another Poodle Claim that falls completely apart when actually examined. Color me not surprised in the least.

 

[P@triot]

Uh, sorry, Poodle, what screwed up Academia is capitalism and greed.

Yawn. You’ve used that idiotic U.S.S.R. communist line in every post. It’s tired. It’s old. And it’s been disproven every time you’ve used it.

Capitalism was used in the 1700’s when many institutions (such as the Ivy League) were founded. Prices remained extremely affordable in that century and through most of the 1900’s.

So what happened? What changed? Idiotic progressives (such as yourself) got government involved in the 1980’s. Once universities learned that government would throw loans at students, they realized they had a blank check. The free-market was no longer working to keep prices in check. Since everyone could afford ANY price thanks to government interference, universities jacked up their prices.

Once again, you’ve been embarrassed with facts. Once again, you’ve proven to everyone here that you don’t know what you’re taking about AND that you just make shit up as you go.

 

[P@triot]

Again, this isn't a new problem, Poodle.

Bwahahaha! Well there is some fine liberal “logic”. Defend the indefensible by proclaiming you’ve been engaged in the inexcusable behavior for a long time.

The problem here is that universities have always worked on a system of "Publish or Perish".

You apparently take the same approach on USMB. Because you post nothing but nonsense and bullshit. Most people post because they have something to say. You post because you feel you must just say something.

Doesn't matter how good of a TEACHER you are, it matters to them how often you get published.

That’s not what is being discussed right now, snowflake. In your haste to promote all things communist, you failed to understand that the issue is that papers are being “approved” and “published” from academia without even being read, examined, or challenged.

And then nitwits (such as yourself) point to them as “fact”.

 

[P@triot]

The “Grievance Studies” Hoax Does Not Reveal the Academic Scandal That It Claims

Let’s analyze the hoax a bit more carefully.

Yes! Let’s do that! Once again we see you comically clinging to complete and total nonsense in a desperate attempt to reject the reality that you find so uncomfortable because it doesn’t align with the bat-shit crazy ideology you were so easily duped into buying into.

The team wrote up 21 bogus papers altogether. (The essay starts by saying there were only 20; according to Lindsay, that’s because two of the papers were largely similar to one another.) Of those 21, two-thirds never were accepted for publication.

Oh...ok. As long as “only” 1/3 of their bogus papers made it through, then it doesn’t really count! We can absolutely ignore 33% of all published papers being bogus.

So another Poodle Claim that falls completely apart when actually examined. Color me not surprised in the least.

Once again son, we see you being desperate, disingenuous, angry, and uninformed.

 

[bodecea]

Quit lying, Joe. You claimed they killed him because he married 14-year-old girls. That was clearly not true.

The real reason is that he shut down a newspaper that was hostile to him:

Hostile to him because they published stories about his polygamy with 14 year old girls!!!

Joseph Smith, as mayor of the town of Nauvoo, Illinois, had ordered the destruction of the facilities producing the Nauvoo Expositor, a newly established newspaper set up by a group of non-Mormons and people who had seceded from the church. The newspaper's first (and only) issue was deeply critical of Smith and other church leaders—reporting that Smith was practicing polygamy and claiming he intended to set himself up as a theocratic king.

Wiki doesn't mention the age of the wives, moron.

Wiki is valid all by itself now?

 

[bodecea]

Wiki doesn't mention the age of the wives, moron.

True enough... So here's a list of the wives of Joseph Smith.

List of Joseph Smith's wives - Wikipedia

10 of these women were in their teens.

2 of them were 14.

Very normal marrying age for the time.

Ah...and now we know what #MAGA really means to some trumpanzees.

 

[bripat9643]

Wiki doesn't mention the age of the wives, moron.

True enough... So here's a list of the wives of Joseph Smith.

List of Joseph Smith's wives - Wikipedia

10 of these women were in their teens.

2 of them were 14.

Very normal marrying age for the time.

Ah...and now we know what #MAGA really means to some trumpanzees.

We hung some witches in Salem in 1692. Perhaps that's what you believe he meant. How about 1942 when FDR put a bunch of Asian Americans in concentration camps?

 

[P@triot]

Ah...and now we know what #MAGA really means to some trumpanzees.

One can always count on the left for racism. Any black person who dares to leave the government plantation and actually think for themselves will be referred to as a “trumpanzee”.

Classy, Bode. Classy.

 

[JoeB131]

Yawn. You’ve used that idiotic U.S.S.R. communist line in every post. It’s tired. It’s old. And it’s been disproven every time you’ve used it.

Capitalism was used in the 1700’s when many institutions (such as the Ivy League) were founded. Prices remained extremely affordable in that century and through most of the 1900’s.

Most people couldn't afford Ivy League schools back then, either. And frankly, up until the 1940's Capitalism was a true shit sandwich for most people. Child labor, company stores, awful dangerous working conditions. Did they teach you none of this in history class?

You are a stupid little thing, aren't you?

Moving on.

So what happened? What changed? Idiotic progressives (such as yourself) got government involved in the 1980’s. Once universities learned that government would throw loans at students, they realized they had a blank check. The free-market was no longer working to keep prices in check. Since everyone could afford ANY price thanks to government interference, universities jacked up their prices.

Actually, the EXACT opposite happened. YOu see, after the 1940's when you had progressive state governments, you had the establishment of state universities and college for all. you had things like the GI Bill that made college accessible to working folks.

But after the 1980's, when the Shithead Reagan decided that greed was good, the states started cutting back funding to these colleges, and the colleges had to make it up by raising tuition. The banks made a killing off of student loans. And of course, with the disappearance of unions, you really had to go to college if you wanted to get anywhere near a middle class lifestyle.

So you have UIC raising tuition from 1500 a year to 17,000 a year. And this was supposed to be the affordable campus.

That’s not what is being discussed right now, snowflake. In your haste to promote all things communist, you failed to understand that the issue is that papers are being “approved” and “published” from academia without even being read, examined, or challenged.

Except they put 21 papers through, and most of them were rejected.

Oh...ok. As long as “only” 1/3 of their bogus papers made it through, then it doesn’t really count! We can absolutely ignore 33% of all published papers being bogus.

Except, of course, they weren't bogus... four of them were pretty legitimate, and three of them, the truly silly ones, were based on gathered data...

Once again son, we see you being desperate, disingenuous, angry, and uninformed.

Um, no, I just put a different context on the issue than your usual "College liberal... liberal, bad" thinking.

I really do agree there IS a problem with universities being more interested in publishing than teaching. But the sheer volume of things that are published, yup, some silly papers are going to get through the process.

So how did publishing goofy papers actually increase or decrease the value of education? They weren't teaching off the papers, were they? They didn't hand out any Ph.D.s or Master Degrees based on them. Nope, this is just manufactured outrage from a right wing that couldn't gain even a bachelor's degree...