Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)
2. You're only saying that because she's a woman!
Sun Sep 30, 2012, 01:46 PM
Sep 2012

If a man wrote a nonsensical article that came to the exact opposite conclusion the facts supported you'd cheer him on.

This is proof that gender bias is still very much alive.



/while we accidentally disproved our theory our departments funding is based on getting the opposite answer so by goddess we must spin this a full 180 or else risk being driven out of academia with torches and pitchforks.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

There are many layers of fail in this article lumberjack_jeff Sep 2012 #1
You're only saying that because she's a woman! 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #2
Yes. ElboRuum Sep 2012 #4
Did they actually study anything? ElboRuum Sep 2012 #3
It was an interesting meta-study 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #5
Interesting... ElboRuum Oct 2012 #6
And I'm studying the response people have to the meta-meta-study 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #7
This "study" makes no sense. MadrasT Oct 2012 #8
I'm suspicious of many studies as well ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #9
It makes it easy to tell true scientific disciplines from the pseudo-scientific frauds 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #10
Pseudo-science makes me cranky. MadrasT Oct 2012 #11
Critical thinking skills - you haz it opiate69 Oct 2012 #12
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Men's Group»How we judge the mistakes...»Reply #2