A Case Study Showcasing the Academic Asylum

Two real published studies that break the insanity scale

In light of the recent academic jamboree surrounding the disgraced now-ex Harvard president Claudine Gay, there is heightened attention focused on the world of academic literature. Although the coming plagiarism inquisition - justly earned of course - is the predominant fixation of this newfound interest in perusing academic papers, an ancillary effect of mass-testing entire corpora for “duplicative language” should be the discovery of the wealth of dubious woke literature that previously existed exclusively beyond the event horizon of the Ivory Towers, invisible to the public. This literature is a toxic cancerous mass of incoherent gobbledygook that has wrought the wholesale disembowelment of the scientific method so prominently at the fore throughout the pandemic years.

The following two studies - ‘studies’ - perfectly illustrate the limitless intellectual and moral depravity that has taken root in academia. These papers highlight the two types of ideological or scientific derangement afflicting academia - the first showcases intellectually vapid nonsense masquerading as scientific erudition, the second highlights the blatant moral wickedness of modern-day woke ideology in academic institutions.

At the bottom is an additional 31 published studies in the medical literature demonstrating the subjugation of medical science to CRT/DEI/Woke precepts, showcasing how even the “hard science” medical domains have been conquered by the woke parasite. This is particularly relevant in light of the pandemic policy atrocities perpetrated by the fruits of the medical schools and institutions.

Behold a vision of when the inmates are clearly in full control of the academic asylum.

1. Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0309132515623368

This exegetical work of modern art from the University of Oregon by Mark Carey, M. Jackson, Alessandro Antonello and Jaclyn Rushing is probably the looniest [real] paper I have ever seen, which is definitely saying something. Funded in part by your taxpayer dollars of course.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

YOU ARE ENTERING THE TWILIGHT ZONE

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Abstract

We’ll begin with the abstract which does a pretty good job succinctly summarizing the content of this study:

This gibberish is indecipherable even to seasoned academics, who are unlikely to make it past the second sentence where they encounter phrases like “the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers”, or “epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge”, the scientific meaning of which are challenging to comprehend.

The authors then turn to the study’s raison d'être, a proposed “feminist glaciology” framework with four tenets that will fundamentally reset the epistemology of ice studies.

The most charitable reaction to this sentence is that at least we know what they mean to convey by “knowledge producers” - more “diversity” in glaciology.

Gendered science, on the other hand, oh boy. “gendered science”. what even is “gendered science”? Is gendered science a distinct concept apart from “feminist glaciology”? Good questions.

Later we come across what appears to be the mission statement of this incoherent academic albatross:

“Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.”

“merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology” (there’s an oxymoron for you)

They are the literal incarnation of every mocking stereotype of woke professors.

Next question: How does a ‘feminist glaciology framework’ generate robust analysis (or any analysis for that matter) about gender, power or epistemologies? The nexus between the study of ice and novel modern political/social theories about intersectional identities and oppression seems nonexistent.

Moving from the merely absurd to the fantastical lunacy, we are informed that reimagining glaciology using this proposed feminist framework will lead to “more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.”

Just reading that sentence costs you IQ points each time.

More ‘just’ or ‘equitable’ science = replacing objective truth and observation with objectively false assertions to support preferred political/social ideologies.

But what takes the cake is the more just and equitable “human-ice interactions.” Seriously, what the devil is this??? “human-ice interactions is Human-ice interactions are not a moral concept or action.

This paragraph can be said to be avant-garde in a way. Until now, we had the Turing Test to determine if a machine could imitate a human well enough that a human would not be able to discern if he was conversing with a machine or person. This unique scholarship is unambiguous proof that the converse is true as well: a human can imitate an algorithm to the point that it becomes difficult to distinguish whether the author is a human or an algorithm. Perhaps we can call this the “Carey-Jackson Test”. It brings to mind the hilarious but darkly true SCIgen program and Sokal Affair. Since these historical events offer some insight into the present intellectual decay in the academic world, let’s digress a bit to explore these comedic fiascoes:

SCIgen

SCIgen was a computer program that famously conjured up academic papers by cobbling together random scholastic-sounding sentences, wreaking havoc for some time on the “softer sciences” and extracting significant casualties from a variety of journals. The fallout was documented in a real paper published in the prestigious journal Nature titled ‘Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers’.

Yes, that’s *more* than *120* papers withdrawn because they were total gibberish (much like the ramblings of Fauci or Eric Feigl-Ding or famed Eugyppius “mentally vacant covid astrologer” Eric Topol).

So did this precipitate more careful peer review that involved at least one real person actually reading a submission before accepting it?

Nope. That would be too much work. Instead, they created a counter-AI designed to detect incoherent babbling - Springer and Université Joseph Fourier release SciDetect to discover fake scientific papers.

(Left unanswered was how a computer program would be able to effectively distinguish between the incoherent verbal diarrhea of woke professors and the incoherent verbal diarrhea of computer programs. But hey, at least they were nice enough to offer it free of charge to the broader scientific community.)

The Sokal Affair

We’ll just plagiarize from Wikipedia for this one:

In 1996, Sokal submitted an article to Social Text, an academic journal of postmodern cultural studies. The submission was an experiment to test the journal's intellectual rigor, specifically to investigate whether "a leading North American journal of cultural studies—whose editorial collective includes such luminaries as Fredric Jameson and Andrew Ross—[would] publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if (a) it sounded good and (b) it flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions."[2]

The article, "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity",[3] was published in the journal's spring/summer 1996 "Science Wars" issue. It proposed that quantum gravity is a social and linguistic construct. At that time, the journal did not practice academic peer review and it did not submit the article for outside expert review by a physicist.[4][5] Three weeks after its publication in May 1996, Sokal revealed in the magazine Lingua Franca that the article was a hoax.[2]

The hoax caused controversy about the scholarly merit of commentary on the physical sciences by those in the humanities; the influence of postmodern philosophy on social disciplines in general; and academic ethics, including whether Sokal was wrong to deceive the editors or readers of Social Text; and whether Social Text had abided by proper scientific ethics.

Yup, gravity is a social construct. Like gender. At least it’s internally consistent.

Main body of the study

Moving past the abstract, we find the following:

You have to marvel at their adroit linguistic gymnastics to frame the lack of politicization of glaciology - seemingly a straightforward and uncontroversial proposition - as a “perspective” which “appears consistently in public discourse”, as if science sticking to the science is somehow a novel or unexpected paradigm. After all, from a scientific perspective, ice is ice, nothing more.

Alas what follows is precisely what one would expect from woke luminaries:

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

So.

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

“asks if glaciers listen”

Yes, someone indeed did write a whole book, entitled - well, just see for yourself:

https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/distributed/D/bo70055727.html

The rest of this emoting mumbo-jumbo attempting to insert the cultural significance of glaciers into the official scientific discourse, in order to expand the scientific knowledges of ice. Needless to say, there is no place in the scientific - i.e. empirical - study of ice for feelings about the big, beautiful and endangered glaciers.

Next comes this little tidbit:

Nüsser and Baghel (2014) also reject the ‘ice is just ice’ assertion. Glaciers, they argue, ‘have increasingly become contested and controversial objects of knowledge, susceptible to cultural framings as both dangerous and endangered landscapes’ (Nüsser and Baghel, 2014: 138).

So our esteemed titans of erudition here reject the assertion that “ice is just ice”. Really now. This is even more intellectually deranged than the growing number of genders expanding at a faster rate than the physical universe.

What do the authors mean by “susceptible to cultural framings”? That we need to incorporate indigenous people’s mythologies about glaciers into scientific knowledge, something to which they later refer to by way of “folk glaciologies”.

We can go on for dozens of pages cataloguing the numerous craters of delusion pockmarking this scholarly work like Swiss cheese.

Here are a few more highlights:

🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

I wonder how much of this paragraph was plagiarized - it’s just an ode to the transcendent wonders of wokeness applied to glaciology.

Here’s more:

More inverse-Turing test material this is.

And finally, we have…

*Folklore Is Science*

That’s right, we need to integrate *folklore* into science. Ya know, such as mythical “ice-gods” of indigenous worship.

This would make Orwell proud.

Another feature of this study that stands out is the sheer number of papers they cite to buttress various elements of crazed woke lunacy - it at least gives you a sense of just how far and deep woke anti-science has permeated and saturated [what used to be] actual scientific disciplines.

There’s lots more in this stupefying morass of intellectual luddism, but since it’s behind a paywall and I don’t want to run afoul of a copyright issue, we will leave it here.

2. On Having Whiteness

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34039063/

For the second study, instead of the twilight zone, we are heading off to Reich-stan:

This study call to genocide written by one Donald Moss - a white guy, by the way - surely ranks as one of the most morally deranged papers written by modern academia.

In essence, what Moss is putting forth is that all White people intrinsically suffer from a clinical condition that makes them evil and oppressive. He even goes as far as to claim that this affliction is the central defining characteristic of “whiteness”. This is so eerily on point that I genuinely wonder if he is plagiarizing translated Nazi polemics and swapping out the identity of the Untermenschen.

Worse, it was actually published in the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. So we at least know that JAPA is a load of demented psychobabble.

Ask yourself: just how rotten does the culture in academia have to be for an actual journal to publish these rabid deranged rantings of an unhinged lunatic? (Just imagine if someone tried to publish this sort of vile screed about “Jewishness” or “Blackness”...)

Let’s see a few more ‘treasures’ from Donald Moss:

This is the stuff of genocidal regimes, which is not an exaggeration. Dehumanization and portraying a group as a mortal peril to society are recognized as key steps toward the eventual perpetration of genocidal extermination. The Nazis are famous for getting this down to a science.

Even the babies are not safe from this ‘disease’:

And of course, it’s basically incurable:

Donald Moss is a repulsive Nazi wannabe and a demented evil sociopath, yet his racist screed was published nonetheless. This is a testament to the moral depravity that has infested academia that someone could write such a vile philippic masquerading as a ‘study’ in the first place and feel accepted by his peers for it. With educators like this person, it is not unsurprising that hordes of college & university students agree with Osama Bin Ladin’s objectives or overtly support terrorism like the Hamas 10/7 attack and are even willing to give money to the Taliban.

You also have to wonder how many other Donald Mosses are entombed within the halls of the Ivory Towers of academia. The state of campus culture surely means there are many others of the same mindset.

Conclusion

What I have marshalled here is but a drop in the ocean of academic activism and ideological capture of the Ivory fortresses of academia, including the medical fields, something manifest quite sharply throughout the pandemic. The same culture rot visible in the abovementioned papers has poisoned every level of every discipline of medicine and replaced the ancient medical ethos with an ideological perversion of healthcare that has no place in a civilized society.

One need look no farther than the subjects having to do with sexuality or lifestyle, where radical activists have succeeded in suppressing and censoring all scientific research in order to maintain the numerous fictions necessary to propping up their tangled and conflicting mess of incoherent and contradictory conceptual frameworks (something brilliantly demonstrated by Matt Walsh’s documentary “What is a Woman”).

Whether higher education is salvageable at this point is unclear. What is beyond doubt is the total systemic corruption and capture of the culture and institutions of higher education.

**************************

Here is a selection of 31 papers documenting CRT in the medical community, literature, and schools:

1. Making science and doing justice: The need to reframe research on racial inequities in oral health
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33780174/

2. The Role of Emotion in Understanding Whiteness
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33415593/

3. The effects of whiteness on the health of whites in the USA
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28716453/

4. Racism and Kidney Health: Turning Equity Into a Reality
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33639186/

5. Visions by Women in Molecular Imaging Network: Antiracism and Allyship in Action
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33754293/

6. White dominance in nursing education: A target for anti-racist efforts
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32881135/

7. Rooting Out White Supremacy and Implementing Antiracism in Nursing Education
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33574169/

8. Achieving Health Equity Through Eradicating Structural Racism in the United States: A Call to Action for Nursing Leadership
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33002309/

9. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Nursing: The Pathway to Excellence Framework Alignment
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34469389/

10. Transformative dissonant encounters: Opportunities for cultivating antiracism in White nursing students
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34350660/

11. How to Be An Antiracist Hand Surgery Educator
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33762091/

12. From Diversity and Inclusion to Antiracism in Medical Training Institutions
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33637659/

13. Academic Medicine's Journey Toward Racial Equity Must Be Grounded in History: Recommendations for Becoming an Antiracist Academic Medical Center
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34432719/

14. Approaching the COVID-19 Pandemic Response With a Health Equity Lens: A Framework for Academic Health Systems
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34705750/

15. Understanding Racism as a Historical Trauma That Remains Today: Implications for the Nursing Profession
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33574167/

16. Entrenched White Supremacy in Nursing Education Administrative Structures
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33574166/

17. A Nurse Educator's Perspective About Institutional Racism and White Supremacy in Nursing Education
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33574170/

18. Professionalism: The Wrong Tool to Solve the Right Problem?
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32134778/

19. Student-Led Efforts to Advance Anti-Racist Medical Education
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33711839/

20.The White/Black hierarchy institutionalizes White supremacy in nursing and nursing leadership in the United States
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33867099/

21. The lived experience of teaching about race in cultural nursing education
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24682320/

22. Continuing the conversation in nursing on race and racism
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23419839/

23. Pandemic racism – and the nursing response
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/artic…

24. Nursing's role in racism and African American women's health
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10409989/

25. Something Old, Something New: The Syndemic of Racism and COVID-19 and Its Implications for Medical Education
journals.stfm.org/familymedicine…

26. Improving cross-cultural care and antiracism in nursing education: a literature review
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19758731/

27. Weaving Antiracism Practice and Equity Into the Fabric of Cardiovascular Fellowship: A New Training Paradigm
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34857097/

28. Promoting Diversity and Inclusion in Surgical Societies: Representation Matters
journals.lww.com/annalsofsurger…

29. The Ethical Imperative of Equity in Oncology: Lessons Learned From 2020 and a Path Forward
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34061560/

30. Navigating inequities: a roadmap out of the pandemic
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33479019/

31. Culture, Race, and Health: Implications for Racial Inequities and Population Health
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31512293/