changed description "Hi, You have the makings of a great website. Right now I would give it a good rating. My one dislike about Academy.edu articles is that there seems to be little attempt to control articles that are submitted by amateurs who clearly don't have a useful grasp of the material they are "theorizing" about. Unfortunately, I recently printed and tried to read an article about the centurys old debate about the origin of the Etruscans and the Etruscan language. Useless. And a waste of paper and ink, and my time (even though I gave up after 2 pages). So, I have an idea that might be of some use to you. An effective way to identify and dismiss these articles is an app that looks for phrases like: "I have proof", or (worse) "I have absolute proof...", or "this proof is real", or "without question this is...", or "this is the only possible..." in the submitted material. IMHO, these phrases "absolutely prove" that the author is being driven by achieving quick scientific "dreams of glory", and not by the grind of scientific methodology and discovery. Actually, any scientific article that uses the word "proof" (with the exception of mathematics or logic and similar) should be sufficient to disqualify an article. I hope this helps. Ken Robinson LNDENCH@COMCAST.NET "

changed description "Hi, You have the makings of a great website. Right now I would give it a good rating. My one dislike about Academy.edu articles is that there seems to be little attempt to control articles that are submitted by amateurs who clearly don't have a useful grasp of the material they are "theorizing" about. Unfortunately, I recently printed and tried to read an article about the centurys old debate about the origin of the Etruscans and the Etruscan language. Useless. And a waste of paper and ink, and my time (even though I gave up after 2 pages). So, I have an idea that might be of some use to you. An effective way to identify and dismiss these articles is an app that looks for phrases like: "I have proof", or (worse) "I have absolute proof...", or "this proof is real", or "without question this is...", or "this is the only possible..." in the submitted material. IMHO, these phrases "absolutely prove" that the accurately predict that the author is being driven by achieving quick scientific "dreams of glory", and not by the grind of scientific methodology and discovery. Actually, any scientific article that uses the only the word "proof" (with the exception of mathematics or logic and or similar) should be sufficient to disqualify an article. I hope this helps. Ken Robinson "

changed description "Hi, You have the makings of a great website. Right now I would give it a good rating. My one dislike about Academy.edu articles is that there seems to be little attempt to control articles that are submitted by amateurs who clearly don't have a useful grasp of the material they are "theorizing" about. Unfortunately, I recently printed and tried to read an article about the centurys old debate about the origin of the Etruscans and the Etruscan language. Useless. And a waste of paper and ink, and my time (even though I gave up after 2 pages). So, I have an idea that might be of some use to you. An effective way to identify and dismiss these articles is an app that looks for phrases like: "I have proof", or (worse) "I have absolute proof...", or "this proof is real", or "without question this is...", or "this is the only possible..." in the submitted material. IMHO, these phrases accurately predict that the author is being driven by achieving quick scientific "dreams of glory", and not by the grind of scientific methodology and discovery. Actually, any scientific article that just uses only the word "proof" by itself (with the exception of mathematics or logic or similar) should be sufficient to disqualify an article. I hope this helps. Ken Robinson "

changed description "Hi, You have the makings of a great website. Right now I would give it a good rating. My one dislike about Academy.edu articles is that there seems to be little attempt to control articles that are submitted by amateurs who clearly don't have a useful grasp of the material they are "theorizing" about. Unfortunately, I recently printed and tried to read an article about the centurys old debate about the origin of the Etruscans and the Etruscan language. Useless. And a waste of paper and ink, and my time (even though I gave up after 2 pages). So, I have an idea that might be of some use to you. An effective way to identify and dismiss these articles is an app that looks for phrases like: "I have proof", or (worse) "I have absolute proof...", or "this proof is real", or "without question this is...", or "this is the only possible..." in the submitted material. IMHO, these phrases accurately predict that the author is being driven by achieving quick scientific "dreams of glory", and not by the grind of scientific methodology and discovery. Actually, any scientific article that just uses the word "proof" by itself (with the exception of mathematics or logic or similar) should be sufficient to disqualify an article. I hope this helps. Ken Robinson Hi, You have the makings of a great website. Right now I would give it a good rating. My one dislike about Academy.edu articles is that there seems to be little attempt to control articles that are submitted by amateurs who clearly don't have a useful grasp of the material they are "theorizing" about. Unfortunately, I recently printed and tried to read an article about the centurys old debate about the origin of the Etruscans and the Etruscan language. Useless. And a waste of paper and ink, and my time (even though I gave up after 2 pages). So, I have an idea that might be of some use to you. An effective way to identify and dismiss these articles is an app that looks for phrases like: "I have proof", or (worse) "I have absolute proof...", or "this proof is real", or "without question this is...", or "this is the only possible..." in the submitted material. IMHO, these phrases accurately predict that the author is being driven by achieving quick scientific "dreams of glory", and not by the grind of scientific methodology and discovery. Actually, any scientific article that just uses the word "proof" by itself (with the exception of mathematics or logic or similar) should be sufficient to disqualify an article. I hope this helps. Ken Robinson"

changed description "Hi, You have the makings of a great website. Right now I would give it a good rating. My one dislike about Academy.edu articles is that there seems to be little attempt to control articles that are submitted by amateurs who clearly don't have a useful grasp of the material they are "theorizing" about. Unfortunately, I recently printed and tried to read an article about the centurys old debate about the origin of the Etruscans and the Etruscan language. Useless. And a waste of paper and ink, and my time (even though I gave up after 2 pages). So, I have an idea that might be of some use to you. An effective way to identify and dismiss these articles is an app that looks for phrases like: "I have proof", or (worse) "I have absolute proof...", or "this proof is real", or "without question this is...", or "this is the only possible..." in the submitted material. IMHO, these phrases These phrases accurately predict that the author is being driven by achieving quick scientific "dreams of glory", and not by the grind of scientific methodology and discovery. Actually, any scientific article that just uses the word "proof" by itself (with the exception of mathematics or logic or similar) should be sufficient to disqualify an article. I hope this helps. Ken Robinson "

changed description "Hi, You have the makings of a great website. Right now I would give it a good rating. My one dislike about Academy.edu articles is that there seems to be little attempt to control articles that are submitted by amateurs who clearly don't have a useful grasp of the material they are "theorizing" about. Unfortunately, I recently printed and tried to read an article about the centurys old debate about the origin of the Etruscans and the Etruscan language. Useless. And a waste of paper and ink, and my time (even though I gave up after 2 pages). So, I have an idea that might be of some use to you. An effective way to identify and dismiss these articles is an app that looks for phrases like: "I have proof", or (worse) "I have absolute proof...", or "this proof is real", or real" (read this is one of A's articles), or "without question this is...", or "this is the only possible..." in the submitted material. These phrases accurately predict that the author is being driven by achieving quick scientific "dreams of glory", and not by the grind of scientific methodology and discovery. Actually, any scientific article that just uses the word "proof" by itself (with the exception of mathematics or logic or similar) should be sufficient to disqualify an article. I hope this helps. Ken Robinson "