support that complete and utter bullshit
(0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading ...
Add to favorites 
Processing your request, Please wait....
Leave a comment ?
(0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading ...Add to favorites 
March 17, 2011 at 10:59 am
Just because its published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, doesn’t mean its not bullshit. Trust me, I publish bullshit in peer-reviewed journals all the time.
March 17, 2011 at 3:26 pm
You seem to know a lot about peer-reviewed scientific journal bullshit. Would you be so kind as to provide me links to your published, peer reviewed scientific articles to support that complete and utter bullshit post?
March 17, 2011 at 3:48 pm
The point about peer-reviewed scientific articles isn’t that being peer-reviewed automatically means they’re absolute truths, but that ideas that have never appeared in peer-reviewed journals because they don’t survive even the slightest scientific scrutiny do tend to be BS in much, MUCH larger proportion than the other ones.
March 17, 2011 at 4:11 pm
Sure this one:
www.springerlink.com/content/jm881424r8x1n836/
The synthesis procedure is total BS. Notice the yield isn’t reported? That’s because its only like 5%. If you try the same reaction with a longer peptide, it never works. We got just barely enough of the stuff show that it works in principle and now I’m working on a more efficient procedure to make it.
March 17, 2011 at 8:06 pm
What now, faggobama?
That’s right. I just made up a word. Faggobama. And I called you it. Because this image sucks and not in the good ‘like your mother’ way.
March 17, 2011 at 6:44 pm
I wonder if anyone would be offended if I borrowed this to use as the background for my avatar on ATS?