About tropics, merchants, and personal preferences

Proof?

As far as I know, Mr. Dubrovsky offered to go to Tajikistan as part of a soy group with a small condition - all caught butterflies of A1 quality are left to him. Otherwise, the person is handed over to local law enforcement/customs authorities.
"Business is war" (Japanese proverb)
http://kob.su/content/sakhalinskii-intsidi...-mishiel-chitat

I shouldn't have written it! I expected this from a young scientist and man. And this is just one case.
In my opinion, it is no longer necessary to talk about science. With a person, everything is clear.

What surprises you so much?
Yes, try to go to those places without the appropriate equipment..true, as some people said here- "this is that 2 fingers..." This is not Penza, my dear (the edge is not open!), my friend..it's so-so..Dubrovsky and Co .. took a risk..but..YOU WERE NOT IMPRESSED.Just think!What nonsense..probably a photo montage?

What surprises you so much?
Yes, try to go to those places without the appropriate equipment..true, as some people said here- "this is that 2 fingers..." This is not Penza, my dear (the edge is not open!), my friend..it's so-so..Dubrovsky and Co .. took a risk..but..YOU WERE NOT IMPRESSED.Just think!What nonsense..probably a photo montage?

I'll probably surprise you! But it's not just your clients who go on expeditions.

Yes, with a net and a submachine gun it is fashionable to catch much more than just with a net))))))

Only here in the vicinity of Pumice stone, something tells me, the machine would also not hurt)) I'd rather go to Kazakhtan without than vice versa

.. people went where you and I are(if they want to, THEY WON'T LET US IN!!) And more than once.How they got there is another matter.But I do know:time and money!Not just a visit or:they brought the material, described it, voiced it(maybe they sold something to discourage the audience!).THIS IS WORTHY OF RESPECT,

Where did you describe what you said??? Where will they not let you in if you want to? Only in 2011, there were 2 people I knew in Afghanistan (not entomologists). Don't create idols for yourself.

Strongly But but also not for science, but for fun

But I have no complaints about Shaposhnikov. I have nothing against him. He offered to come with us. I thought, why do I need a person unknown to me, whom I will drag, I will make him documents, he will know all sorts of points, catch on them, and then you look and bargain to the left. What do I need it for, I thought ?
And I set a condition, by the way, not the same as you wrote there. But the control of the material on our part was a condition. He said I'll think about it, and disappeared. Meanwhile, it's time to get ready for the trip. I write to him, but he doesn't answer. And he, it turns out, was already riding with Korb in full force.
More crazy act )))
This can really be put forward for the "hero's star"
That's what Shaposhnikov wrote to me after a crazy act with the words "I didn't like it, take me with you next time" )) Yes, but there is no longer any trust, and there was none at all. I'll find out who your friend is, and I'll find out who you are. Ah rhopalocera.com " a friend of his. No offense. Doubtful. Especially in light of this sera.

In fact, I would like to say about one of the "simple things" - to discuss on the forum the merits of a dissertation approved by VAK, just like scaring carp by farting in the water. To criticize an already" defended " dissertation is to challenge the decision of the attestation commission;
and what does the forum have to do with it?
If you do not agree with the decision of the Higher Attestation Commission, please write to the Higher Attestation Commission.
Otherwise, it's just envy and unfulfilled ambition.
Well, - the second (along the way). From what ...? (option: oak)" collapsed "the requirement to submit a" report "(even in the form of articles) on the forum about the work done (expeditions, etc.)?
To paraphrase the proverb (Großsein tut's nicht allein, sonst holte die Kuh den Hasen ein), being a big and fat amateur (dilettante) does not mean being a small professional: otherwise a cow could catch up with a hare.

But the control of the material on our part was a condition. .
More crazy act )))
Yes, but there is no longer any trust, and there was none at all. I'll find out who your friend is, and I'll find out who you are. Ah rhopalocera.com " a friend of his.

I wouldn't go exploring with you for sure.

today, 19: 17 URL #293

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proof?
rhopalocera. com
Regular member
nino
today, 19: 20 URL #294
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://cs4460.userapi.com/u2436064/114287458/z_834c1c16.jpg
then look for it yourself

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------"
Guys, this is a dummy training machine! And even without a store. This is just to disguise them given- "safety precautions" in the hot zone. Probably, the Mujahideen are such fools that they were afraid, they decided that they were being rounded up. And they were nowhere near there, otherwise our travelers would be on opium plantations.

Kick-ass... Even the troll Justus was lured out of the cave...

you have a strange worldview

Not at all. People are strange when you're a stranger...

For many years I have been living on a simple schedule: 8-00-wake up, from 9-00 to 17-00-work "for money", from 18-00 to 1-00 - entomology, from 1-00 to 8-00-sleep

Simply, - I live on a "different" schedule, "radically" different from yours: 6-00-rise, and only then - to the toilet, but not vice versa.

Laurel, do not give out wishful thinking.)))) The weapons are real, and the ammunition is real, too. And it does not cool down when, very much my work. Do you want to taste it ? )))))

Do you want to taste it ?

Show-offs... One of the most dishy ones is verbal.

Guest
IP-stamp: fr. Ng1Y2cEgrE
guest
today, 23: 06 URL #342 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bolshakov's comment is a clear attempt to discount what is shown in the photo.
-------------------------------------------
I played with such toys at school during the NVP lessons (there were such toys once). A decommissioned piece of hardware with a drilled barrel, but you can disassemble and click. This is called "training". And even if they give the child to hold a real one and take a picture, it's still without ammunition. Although even for this (the transfer of personal weapons to anyone), a serviceman should be severely punished.
No border patrol chief wants to go to jail for a pathetic entomological baksheesh-that's the logic of my judgment.

In addition, if outsiders in the border zone even slightly scratch - the head of the border unit to be without shoulder straps and pension, and if (God forbid) kill - and prison. Therefore, outsiders are not allowed to enter really dangerous areas even for large bribes. The children at school did not get enough of playing "Zarnitsa" - even if they made faces in front of the lens.

  http://cs4460.userapi.com/u2436064/114287458/z_834c1c16.jpg

http://cs5633.userapi.com/u2436064/140644306/w_9c73b9b6.jpg

then look for it yourself

Dubrovsky takes the Saiga carbine to his expeditions in Eastern Siberia. And it does the right thing. Bears eat tourists there. Tourists have nothing to eat there often. Because you can't take much away. A hare and a partridge are easy to shoot. In Afghan (Tajik?) the photo machine was given to him for a photo shoot. So what? Who hasn't taken a photo with a weapon as a keepsake in extreme regions? One Sinyaev has such photos-for a whole album! Speculation, "compromising evidence"... Like if the author is a "bad boy", but he is also a scientist. Kindergarten. You criticize his work, not his style of behavior!

Saiga on a bear and on a hare is not the same thing)))

If you shoot in the air to scare away or in the mouth, when it is already piled on, any one will do. I don't know what he's wearing now. Ask Dubrovsky.

You already somehow literally perceive everything(about the tooth)..But there is no doubt about this statement of Mr. Lavr..- "And on the "boars" who do not observe scientific ethics and almost openly buy degrees in completely inappropriate places (in this case, at the department where there are no specialists in lepidoptera), we, unlike the department, have a"slingshot".
I still don't understand what he's threatening?

I can't really recommend anything about caddis flies. There are paleoentomologists in PIN.

Is there no one at the Department of Entomology at St. Petersburg State University?
niyaz, try writing to V. V. Stutterer (odonta@mail.ru), he has works on Siberian caddis flies and springweeds and has articles in the Eurasian Entomological Journal.

Choiskat
today, 20: 43 URL #370
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, take care of flies or mosquitoes, niyaz! lol.gif By the
way,Professor Negrobov deals with flies..Try him to "buy" disser-Lavr Bolshakov "tooth gives"that he sells them right and left
------------------------------
I didn't give you any teeth!
There is nothing to say about the flies of the O. P. - a world - renowned specialist - especially about dolichopodids. But on butterflies - Niyaz already knows more about him now.

You criticize his work, not his style of behavior!

So, in my opinion, everything begins here with criticism of the work, but it was the criticized party that considered it necessary to turn the conversation to the style of behavior of opponents and even to their personal data. But the fact that some critics fell for it, unable to withstand the mental strain of lawlessness, I absolutely do not approve, and the critics themselves scolded clearly without pleasure. After all, they would have more than enough academic correctness, which swearing can only weaken (of course, I consider swearing only personal things that are not directly related to the subject of criticism, and not arbitrarily harsh assessments based on quotations and facts).

Unfortunately, it's all back to this - [attachmentid()=136583]

I don't like such opportunistic phrases, although I haven't scolded them myself. After all, this is clearly an attempt to equate the one who has specific textually and factually justified claims (and the hard assessments that follow irrefutably from them, in which there was not an ounce of exaggeration of the disaster) with the one who, offended by the bitter truth, can only draw both himself and critics into the conflict depicted in the picture in response to it. the process. But in a few pages, the wise outsiders had a hundred opportunities to express their position academically on the substance of the main issue, which would have been more interesting to everyone than the general assessments given down after a fight. As if without them, the participants in the dispute do not understand the situation. It's just that for some it is beneficial, and for others it is the result of emotional discomfort, which is always higher for the right than for the wrong when swearing.

Regarding the Voronezh CC (this may be useful for T. MisterXus, and for a moderately anonymous guest), I can add something from my "memories and reflections", but I will do it in the topic about CC.

This is the most emotional discomfort I had in mind when I posted the picture. And this is by no means a condescending assessment - just reading how people dump underwear into the light is not very pleasant. I'm in a very bad mood, for example. I do not presume to judge who is right and who is wrong, most of the participants in this dispute did not show their best side. And most importantly, everyone remained in their opinion. Well, you can't prove the researcher's failure on the forum, even if he is the most damned scoundrel. Everyone should form their own opinion themselves (and not on the Internet, but in practice)

And as a result, what opinion will novice entomologists get about all this cuisine? niyaz has already begun to look at caddis flies precisely because of familiarization with this fascinating discussion. A specific working advice about further actions of the person (who apparently is ABSOLUTELY NOT FAMILIAR with the process of writing a dissertation) I never got it.

niyaz-I'll give you my personal advice again-look for a manager. No one can guide you in the right direction better than him. Don't try to do the work alone - you'll get bumps and lose time.

And everyone else - patience and happy April Fools ' Day.

So, in my opinion, everything begins here with criticism of the work, but it was the criticized party that considered it necessary to turn the conversation to the style of behavior of opponents and even to their personal data.

Well, yes, it's starting: http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtopic=498693&st=83#. With market swearing. Without evidence of data falsification (that's why it's marketable).

To Mr. Bolshakov: don't twist your tail. In a rather peremptory form, you claimed that Negrobov's suckling children "bought" their fake dissertations from him at the department(who sold them in this case-Vasya, the senior laboratory assistant?And the word "bought" was repeated many times..and before that, they spread quite extensively about the departments of "finally", where pre-center incompetents defend themselves on any mess..

I do not presume to judge who is right and who is wrong, most of the participants in this dispute did not show their best side.

And everyone else - patience and happy April Fools ' Day.

So, I noticed that you "don't undertake to judge" on the merits, and you couldn't resist giving out a sweeping assessment of behavior without sorting out the right and guilty ones. So who should wish patience to whom and who should congratulate whom on April 1? If you don't try to judge who is right and who is wrong (although the question here is simple and actually clear to both sides, hence the bitterness of the conversation), then you can't judge who has shown what side of themselves here. After all, this second one depends entirely on the first one.

To Mr. Bolshakov: don't twist your tail. In a rather peremptory form, you claimed that Negrobov's suckling children "bought" their fake dissertations from him at the department(who sold them in this case-Vasya, the senior laboratory assistant?And the word "bought" was repeated many times..and before that, they spread quite extensively about the departments of "finally", where pre-center incompetents defend themselves on any mess..

And could you finally remind us what post Bolshakov is talking about? I looked at his posts, but I didn't find any "peremptory" phrases in this regard. I think he was talking about buying degrees, not dissertations. After all, in the light of what both sides have said here, the idea of buying a dissertation on lepidoptera there seems already fantastic. I would still understand - buy "dissertations"; but " buy " dissertations???

This post was edited by A. J. Elez-02.04.2012 03: 13

A. J. Elez:Stop distorting it:when making such statements, it is necessary to use facts that Mr. Bolshakov does not have.That's right Justus said:it is ridiculous to question the thesis approved by Vak here-on this resource(or rather, it is ridiculous for a person who has "defended" at least once in his life and has a degree).
I understand that our dispute is an eternal dispute between amateurs and professionals-hence the bitterness.But (!) it is necessary to respect each other(all my posts about this).Ohaivat indiscriminately departments, managers..assume(or rather assert!) about plagiarism or bribery??

A. J. Elez:Stop distorting it:when making such statements, it is necessary to use facts that Mr. Bolshakov does not have.That's right Justus said:it is ridiculous to question the thesis approved by Vak here-on this resource(or rather, it is ridiculous for a person who has "defended" at least once in his life and has a degree).
I understand that our dispute is an eternal dispute between amateurs and professionals-hence the bitterness.But (!) it is necessary to respect each other(all my posts about this).

I'm not twitching, my hands are currently on the keyboard. As I finally deduce from your words, you decided not to give a reference to the specific wording of Bolshakov. But you blame others for wagging your tail and twitching.

Comrade Justus was referring, as I assume, to the practical futility of the local doubts about the decisions of the Higher Attestation Commission, and not to the fact that a person is forbidden to have his own opinion about these decisions and express it, especially if he has quotes in his hands, the authors of which cannot get away from them and can only persistently switch hands. The decision of the Higher Attestation Commission is on your side. So much the worse for you and the Higher Attestation Commission. Here, in addition to the insults that some chose to focus on, scientific criticism was expressed, and not the verdicts of near-scientific offices. I'll tell you such academicians that you will gasp (I myself have an academician as the director of the Institute). Respect for one another is good; but what is it to be understood? For example, the movie Kaltenbrunner said that love for the motherland and the Fuhrer does not consist in blindly lying to party comrades.

The formal correlation between amateur and professional is unscientific. What, the crust is behind the mistakes that were noted in Bolshakov's review? what if someone who understands the scientific level of the reviewed text is an amateur, but a settled professional will certainly support the confusion of banal types, pushing the same type into several groups, including a banal type in the CC for one message? Keep your pocket open. But if you interpret professionalism in essence, then I will agree with your interpretation of the dispute one hundred percent, because both in the topic and in the publications that were mentioned, an amateur helplessness was really demonstrated, in which no crusts will help to pull yourself out of the swamp by the hair.

Ohaivat indiscriminately departments, managers..assume(or rather assert!) about plagiarism or bribery??

The assumption is not a tragedy, and formal accusations would look different from what it sounded like here. Therefore, it is even more useless to discuss this than the sins of the Higher Attestation Commission. But the unjust receipt of degrees is a well-known disease, although formally catching the hand is difficult here. But a competent person can determine this disease in a particular case by its creative symptoms. It is known, for example, that the ratio of the share of self-interest and the share of simple carelessness of the parties in the procedure of dubious assignment of a degree can be calculated almost in half of cases according to certain parameters of the list of references to the defense, according to the reference apparatus, according to the arguments of opponents, etc. specific individuals could have thought ahead of time that the public, in case of reasonable doubt, can not be prohibited from inductive-deductive reasoning of a scientific and biographical plan. And what does "no facts" mean? After all, the doctor also does not ask us about the fact of a specific disease (otherwise why was he taught), but tries to find out the symptoms, and makes a diagnosis based on them himself. Even if the "fact" of buying a cardinal's hat is not known, but if there are a lot of facts that say that its owner does not know the "Our Father" either, are we allowed to draw conclusions? The scientist also differs from derzhimorda in that he is able to deduce one fact from another, and does not require a separate protocol or document for each fact. But one person compromises the entire team, on which his promotion depended, and the Higher Attestation Commission, which the Lord has long despaired of washing white.

You're correcting the wrong side by doing it a disservice. What good would it do if this continued? Down with the hack or down with the criticism? Should we encourage the authors to do their job conscientiously - or should we encourage the reviewer not to see the obvious, forget all the science, start confusing fatheads out of" respect for colleagues", do not scold anyone on their merits, and do not express any obvious suspicions? If you do not confuse respect for your colleagues with academic prostitution, if you do not cover up the question with a nifty "you are all rude", if you start not from the end, but from the beginning, with the elimination of not correct, but erroneous, then the problems of swearing will be removed at once. You need to look at the root. In science, this is the only way to achieve true mutual respect, and all that is necessary.

Ailezu:I will say once again-I can't judge specifically on the subject of the dispute,I don't have enough knowledge in entomology for this,I draw my conclusions from the "style of behavior of critics".Seeing them shuffle facts,take them out of context,belittle(contradict!)them. criticised by using the definition.the manner of denunciation..(the same Lavr Negrobov is either a "world-renowned fly scientist"or a " failed academician", not without elements of schadenfreude). And yet they were ashamed,somewhere even Korb flashed-maybe they say that all is not lost yet, maybe his student(Negobov) will also become a specialist..Thank you, Lord!
In one word, I personally did not see "amateur helplessness" :the usual workflow,people work,they try, if they make a mistake,they will correct it, God forbid(and they do not hide it!)..And they do it where they're supposed to:at the same departments, with the same world-famous bosses, however, with the same Vak.
I wish them every success.
The dogs are barking and the caravan is moving.

Something about co-authorship?Are you sure about this?What was it that offended her to such an extent that she "shared" with a Penza" normal " amateur who does not recognize anyone's authority?
In general, I put an end to it.I'm tired of it.

- man, you've already tired me out to put it mildly in your awesome knowledge of geography! I live and work in the city of Penza (can you read in Latin?).
A highly respected ENTOMOLOGIST by the Entomological Society (not a huckster like you) Lavr Valeryevich Bolshakov lives in Tula.
Once again, mention Penza in the article....
Yes, I don't care about going to Afghanistan - the Wahhabi training camp was slammed a few years ago near Neverkin...
And without the "trunk" in Penza places there is no life at all-score in Yandex "Penza maniac"... last week's "fresh" news...

This post was edited by Penzyak - 02.04.2012 11: 07

Choiskat
today, 10: 09 URL #391
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
........Seeing them shuffle facts,take them out of context,belittle(contradict!)them. criticised by using the definition.the manner of denunciation..(the same Lavr Negrobov is either a "world-renowned fly scientist"or a " failed academician", not without elements of schadenfreude).
-------------------------
What does "specialist" and "academician"have to do with it?. Specialist is knowledge, work, published results, and professor, academician is a nomenclature rank. In this case, a remarkable specialist in dolichopodid flies has long and firmly occupied a managerial position and eventually decided (or was inspired by others-I really don't know these collisions) that he can direct work on any groups of invertebrates. And not just to lead, not just for all groups of invertebrates put in co-authors, but also to support the "dissertation shaft". This is a unique phenomenon in the former USSR and an example of scientific illegibility. In cases, for example, with beetles - we almost do not criticize them, they are lucky, people really work normally, they make mistakes within the permissible limits. In the case of butterflies, which no one studied in the Voronezh Province, except for one Mrs. (I forget her last name) at the end of the 19th century, and the Jura Berezhny (it is modestly not published), "bummer"was published. First, there was a defense on pyadenitsa, which was not supported by specialists in this group, then a mind-blowing and record-breaking Cadastre was published, and then there was a defense on bulavousy. Vodyanov is a specialist in the Bursa market, but not a specialist in diurnal butterflies of the Voronezh Region. This is obvious even to a hedgehog who has read this Inventory.
In this case, there could be no "Turnkey Dissertation" type options due to the complete lack of truly scientific guidance for groups. But there was an uncontrolled transfer of absolutely insolvent individuals to the state. If the same Niyaz comes to Negrobov with a bag of butterflies, he will be very surprised. And for the "own" here is made a relief. And in the end, they all sat down together in a puddle, and no one will give them a hand to pull out - it remains only to make noise here, sitting in a puddle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
after all, they were ashamed, somewhere even Korb flashed-maybe they say everything is not lost yet, maybe his student(Negobov) will also become a specialist..
-----------------------
Yes, not only from him - and I said-take the material to specialists, publish with them - and the blunders will be corrected. But in general, a specialist should be stopped in the process of working on a dissertation, and not 5 years after.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
.... people try, if they make a mistake,they will correct it, God forbid(and they do not hide it!)..And they do it where they're supposed to:at the same departments, with the same world-famous bosses, however, with the same Vak
--------------------------
Well, you can immediately see that the "lawyer" is illiterate in entomology. Where is it that they "do not hide"??? On the contrary, like high school girls, some yell, "don't touch me", "settle down". And where do they "do"? It is not yet visible - so far they are trying to sell exotic products of unclear geographical origin.
You'd better not give them your absolutely illiterate bearish services, because here not only and not so much young people read, but they would go about their own business, where they are not ashamed to call their name.

professor, academician - this is a nomenclature rank

Professor, just so you know , is an academic title (awarded by the VAK) and a position.

In cases, for example, with beetles - we almost do not criticize them, they are lucky, people really work normally, they make mistakes within the permissible limits.

With your level of grammaticality, why don't you criticize" zhukof"?
Here, lucky beetles! We are spared from criticism of a minor specialist.

But there was an uncontrolled transfer of absolutely insolvent individuals to the state.

The phrase "to hold a person's face to a degree without control" does not make sense.
A "one-sided specialist" is like a flux.
And an illiterate "specialist" is similar ... (niskazhuchimuatoapyatnachnezza).

The fact that now CANDIDATES of sciences are "baked" like pies is well known, and for doctoral work, and even more so for the title of academician, you need N-th number of defended candidates. By the way, for a NEWLY MINTED candidate (within the established period of 4 years), a manager in the Russian Federation is paid a bonus of 40 thousand rubles or more... In the West, only a DOCTOR of Science is currently listed among Russian scientists - and a candidate is like a master's degree.... which we teach in the master's program for 2 years.

Let it be known to you,hawkmoth lover, that PhD(doctorate in the blessed West)It is awarded to those who have our so-called boar degree. That's for sure.

By the way, for a NEWLY MINTED candidate (within the established period of 4 years), a manager in the Russian Federation is paid a bonus of 40 thousand rubles or more...

We're too late! today is already the 2nd (April).

My message has nothing to do with the subject of the dispute. Just a few explanations about academic degrees and titles.

Especially for tov. Penzyak

To get the title of a member of the master's degree (and without it, you can't get an academician), you don't need a professorship formally (although, of course, it is welcome). The Academy of Sciences does not pay any bonuses for the protection of graduate students (why only 4 years, and not 3-the term of full-time postgraduate study). They pay a small amount of money on a one-time basis (per year) for management, 5-6 thousand, at best.
Managers, as well as job seekers, are very different. And from some, sometimes more harm than good.
About the West so generally complete nonsense. Specialists are appreciated there, but if you have a degree (a PhD is quite enough) and an official "registration" in the research institute, it makes it easier to conclude contracts with museums.

Well, in the West, our academic degrees, as well as their Ph. D. in our country, are officially not equal to each other. I.e., if you have a ring, then you don't count as a candidate of science in our country, you need to rewrite your dissertation into Russian and re-defend it in the Russian DS.