week 7 dq Falicia Jensen

on a dozen or more occasions I have been scienticficlaly and acadmecilqly dressed down by multiple phd each holders. If you think what I wrote was harsh, you have no idea how professional scientific community researchers and professors in the field operate. Scietnicially and academically what I pointed out were the equivalent of a harsh breath of air being said. AS opposed to going a few rounds with mike tyson. Our dissertation will be about 3 hours possibly more depending on how many questions the review board have. Or how detailed your answers have to be. Based on personal experience, I can literlaly take comments you avhe made specifically to me over the course of the last 5 weeks and scienticially tear you apart. But that would not serve any type of purpose at all. But it does not serve any kind of good at all to work from a stnadapoint of attack counter attack. We are here to find out what does not work and to learn how to fix it. Instead of defending, how about learn what a fellow classmate is pointing out.

Scholastical and scientifically I am being very very nice with my posts. I run what I would say to an actual professoal academic in my head first, someone who has several PhDs has 20 plus years of in field experience has a sequence of laboratories and a staff of 100 both professional and grad students. What would I say to them pointing out mistakes in their either behavior and or their research. You see in the professional realm, when you get past the emotions and the hurt feelings upper upper end professionals demand to be treated with the respect of being honest. If they made a mistake, they demend that mistake pointed out. If the mistake is a critical one, that mistake needs to be claeriifed with molecual precition. Same mechanical works int eh military, the person who knows is in charge.

If the specialist knows more than the 5 star general, than the specialist is in charge. THE generao follows the orders of the E4 knows; it does not matter at all how many soldiers are under that e4s commands. If they e4 knows how to fixe the problem, the e4 is the CO. Period. Same works in acadmics, because in acadmics/science if you know more than the ego monster than pointing it out saves lives. the ego monster will just have to deal with their emotions on another day. If critical mistakes are part of the equation, and those critical mistakes have a repeat sequenal pattern to them. I was actually giving you the respect of being professional to professional. You were making mistakes, mistakes which have completely compromised my trust in your academic ability. If you scienticially pointed something out regarding in the field of science or acadmics, I would not believe it till I thoroughly tested it first. I would not take your word for it. “say it better”, “say it nicer”. Sorry but acaddmicaly and science are not about emotionsl, they are about digginf for the truth and facts. the facts which are and should be the one and only thing which drives acadmics. not how someone feelings are hurt by mistakes being pointed out.

Why do I wrote to you, you are the first to reply. I like getting my dq homework done as quickly as possible. so I can focus on other htings. Other things take up a profoundly large amount of my consentatiotn. If you are offended by what I write. stop reading it. Are my comments emotional, no. If I was to be emotional with my responses I would hammer you back acadmicailly extremely hard. these posts are the nicests way to point out in a professional manner mistakes. if you do not like your mistakes pointed out, sotp reading my posts. why should how you emotionally respond to my homework affect me. since the obiouvsly answer would be to use the normal junior high “do not talk to me” phrase. Since this is a phd level class, taking about how to be professioans in the field of acadmicsly “do not talk to me”, is a 14 year old response to another 14 year old. Usually male female issues. Which I did not understand when I was 14 and understand less now I am 48. This is acadmcialy, not lets all make each other feel good and ignore what we are doing wwrong. Yelling at me about how much I hurt your and others feelings, accomplishes nothing for me, nothing for the class, and is entirely disruptive. If you do not like what I write, have the maturity and free will to not read it. We have to respond to at least 2 if not 4 posts per week. You post first, I reply first. Or did you not notice that in the last 7 weeks. One of the three of us psots first on Monday. I reply to the other two. That is the consistent mathematacis. I have to reply, according to the layers of rules for being in a class. I reply with a “substantive” reply. I am not a fan of “yes I agree with you”, so I post something with meat. Maybe you should reexamine the scientific method part of “vigerious testing”, since the testing procedures are not about emotional but are purely about find the mistakes, find the mistakes, find the mistakes, forse it to break to predict where the item will no longer apply causing a mistake, etc.

Example intentionally smash a car into a wall to find out exactly hwere the parts will break at what variables. To find out exactly what its tollerances are. Acadmcialiy is about continuously breaking and rebreaking and rebreaking you to find out where your tolelrangages are. Can you and a person stand up to the riggors of scienticif examination or are you going to be all emotional abougt being treated rudely when your ideas are destroyed. not because they are wrong, but because you have to be able to say to Heisenberg, Einstein, etc. “you are wrong, my ideas are correct”. HUP was created at a math's conference when Heisenberg came up to the great nobel winning Einstein and told him “you are wrong”. They aregued for the entirely length of the conference. At the end HUP was crdeated. Heisenbergs Uncdrtainy PRincable; which I can absotleuly defined for you; which proves a profrtion of the theory of relatively wrong. But you have to be able to stand up in the field of acadmicsly and go toe to toe with your betters and let them destroy you and yoru ideas. they wil not be nice, kind, caring, or even mildly ok with your emotional state. they will take yoru emotmionals as weakness and tear you apart harder. Right now if you brought your phd to a dissertation committee, you could have the currie dissertation in your hand. you would be destoyred by the review panel. My comments are less than nothing comparerd to what you can expect in what 4 to 5 years when you go to your phd review. You have to stand before einstine and say “you are wreong, and prove it.” then stand up for a few hours regarding your ideas, yourself, and yoru personally destoyrd to find out if you can stand up to basic scienticif criticism.

Reference watch the tv show greys anatomy when they went for their boards. That is semi close. I was giving you the respect of being a professional who can handle professional level acadmicaly criticism. are you sahign I was wrong, that you cannot handle professional level acadicaly lcriticam. I did not offer profesially level critisma, I offered upper end amaterou critism.