The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Can blog posts be better than journal articles? > Comments

Can blog posts be better than journal articles? : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 2/6/2017

Lakensís goal is to improve the quality of journal articles, not to replace articles with blog posts.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
It matters little. Most blogs and journals are not read by the silent majority, and it is that majority that make decisions, not elitist pontifcators in any medium.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 2 June 2017 9:43:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Both journals and blogs often distort the truth.
I think blog posts are better because they provide for there and then comment and perhaps chance to air the truth.

Whatever, just look at the waste of words and time about Co2 emissions agenda that has led to increased cost of energy plus massive disruption to business and household budget's and livelihood.

Yes blog posts are better
Posted by JF Aus, Friday, 2 June 2017 10:06:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Why not? Neither intelligence nor retentive memory are dispensed in elite universities, but rather by nature and genes?

One recalls at the start of WW1, most if not all Queen's commissions almost always went to the sons of the privileged elite landed gentry, rather than the most intelligent or capable!

Thus some fellows with IQ's roughly equal to the ambient temperature, where given charge of real men, for whom, were thought of as little more than expendable tin soldiers or robots! WW11, was a little different ,where our two best generals were a banana farmer and a steam engineer? Not indoctrinated acidemics!

Journalism functions best when reporters report the facts rather than as seems all too the case, opinion? Or selectively chosen facts that can be so arranged as to distort/conceal rather than illuminate the truth?

And opinion pieces should reflect public opinion rather than mould or massage it into something that merely confirms the conformational bias of the owner or editor in chief!

Blogs and social media allow the truth and or public opinion to be aired and ventilated, even when accompanied by atrocious grammar.

People often say they are Christian even when they don't believe in a creator or organized religion, just the mighty irrefutable truth! Not for nothing is it writ large, know the truth and the truth will set you free!

Simply put, nobody can own their own facts, thus we have an ovoid world inside a solar system, somewhere near the rim of the milky way. And real climate change, created in part by humanity!

We know what needs to be done to reverse it? And opposed on all sides by vested interest, bought and paid for politicians and their tame academics, keen as always to redirect proper public scrutiny elsewhere?

Or into irrelevance? Or sent flying into ever decreasing circles to eventually disappear up its own fundamental orifice.

As the Bob Katter said, we need a royal commision, if only to expose the rorts, rip offs and or corruption in the energy sector?

That said, I generally agree with your general agreement.
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Friday, 2 June 2017 10:59:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anyone can write blog posts. And that should be a good thing. Alas many people judge a blog post not by the quality of its data and analysis, but by whether its conclusions fit their prejudices.

This is particularly true in the area of climate science, where denialists continue to claim there's been no warming since 1998 because a five year old blog post says so. Or where bloggers discover something climatologists have always known about, assume the climatologists to be ignorant of it, misinterpret its implications, and claim it invalidates what the climatologists claim.

...As has previously happened on this site!
Posted by Aidan, Friday, 2 June 2017 12:14:08 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Come on Aidan, I don't know any climate denialists claiming there has been no warming since 1998 these days.

What they are proving is that there has been a cooling in many parts of the planet. Just no warming is so passť.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 2 June 2017 9:04:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen,
"Come on Aidan, I don't know any climate denialists claiming there has been no warming since 1998 these days."
Isn't Leo Lane still making that claim?
If not, when did he stop?

"What they are proving is that there has been a cooling in many parts of the planet."
And how many decades has it been since the climatologists first warned that global warming could cool some parts of the world by altering ocean currents?
Posted by Aidan, Saturday, 3 June 2017 2:41:51 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy