Abstracts on entomology

Any attentive person who doesn't give a shit will note - what is it? far from the beginning...

On the other hand, there are often a lot of criminals where they are well caught. There was a principled Bolshakov on this kralyu with a smile.

I Googled it - it looks like Korotkova still won and is now on the horse:
http://fund-sd.ru/rmo/rmo-raund-1-html/tula-html/index.htm
http://www.tspu.tula.ru/content/about/struct

I Googled it - it looks like Korotkova still won and is now on the horse:
http://fund-sd.ru/rmo/rmo-raund-1-html/tula-html/index.htm
http://www.tspu.tula.ru/content/about/struct

Such a horse only they, I hope, need)

There was a principled Bolshakov on this kralyu with a smile.

Found it... and lost. Now there will be less adherence to principles in these matters... sorry

I do not understand how a council of non-biologists can award a degree in biol. sciences - such a position of the Higher Attestation Commission can not be ... och. strange...

Why not try to change (slow down) the trend by totally criticizing the upcoming DD of Mr. Bondarenko?
Moreover, good specialists both in the group as a whole and in the fauna of rasm. territories, there are enough of them.

This post was edited by Adamov - 28.10.2010 23: 13

Found it... and lost. Now there will be less adherence to principles in these matters... unfortunately

So Korotkova, as they say, spat into eternity - and Lavr Bolshakov just did what he could. Someday all the dots over E will be put. Sometimes a dragon can be starved to death.

These are the pies!

Tough ones!

And they smell bad!

I do not understand how a council of non-biologists can award a degree in biol. sciences - such a position of the Higher Attestation Commission can not be ... och. strange...

Alternatively-for good money.

It is necessary to write a doctoral thesis "Papilio machaon: ecology and population of a Red-listed sailboat species". And what if such dissertations pass - then this one will pass 100%. The population is there, the environment is there, and there is also a lot about nature protection :D.

Yes, you can read this-
http://vak.ed.gov.ru/ru/dissertation/index.php?id54=6451

  http://vak.ed.gov.ru/ru/dissertation/index...NCH_SCIENCE52=2

error returns

  http://vak.ed.gov.ru/ru/dissertation/index...NCH_SCIENCE52=2

In this abstract, it is enough to correct only one sentence and everything will fall into place. If the main goal of the work is reformulated as "obtaining the degree of doctor of biological sciences", then everything will look quite organic.

The author of the abstract will receive a degree and will produce the same mediocrity... This is all very, very sad...

Yes, it's not a matter of mediocrity. The author is not a stupid person. It's just that this is already undisguised careerism. That's what's so sad. And when a career is made without regard to scientific reliability...

Yes, it's not a matter of mediocrity. The author is not a stupid person. It's just that this is already undisguised careerism. That's what's so sad. And when a career is made without regard to scientific reliability...

Isn't that just incompetence? It seems to me that what distinguishes a true scientist from a mediocre one is his love of truth, clarity, accuracy, and scientific integrity.

Well, the topic of the" realness " of scientists can be discussed endlessly .

Hurrah for Russian science!
Protect yourself can be too, since it's so easy right now )

Depends on where.

Hurrah for Russian science!
Protect yourself can be too, since it's so easy right now )

Yeah, try it in Zina and see what happens!

I think I can do it in Zina. the school I went through is quite serious. I don't have much time for my dissertation, to be honest. I don't work in academic structures, I won't have any extra fees for my degree-so why should I tear up my poo? I'd rather use this time more usefully

Were there any positive reviews? From whom?

There were 22 positive reviews and 7 negative ones. technically, everything was pretty clean. I defended myself and thank God.

This post was edited by Yakovlev - 17.02.2011 12: 54

I didn't get the negative message. feedback... mmmm.... by accident, of course... in general, you can send it to the Higher Attestation Commission... and a reasoned letter...... Doct. degrees are awarded not by the Council (as cand.), but by the Higher Attestation Commission...

I didn't get the negative message. feedback... mmmm.... by accident, of course... in general, you can send it to the Higher Attestation Commission... and a reasoned letter...... Doct. degrees are awarded not by the Council (as a candidate), but by the Higher Attestation Commission...

Yes, of course. A letter to the Higher Attestation Commission is exactly what you should do. No matter how many negative reviews on the abstract are submitted for defense and no matter how serious the criticism expressed in them is, the decision is up to the Council. And if the Council, for one reason or another, voted "yes" - the Higher Attestation Commission will consider that the dissertation candidate has convincingly answered the criticism. Consequently, these negative reviews (including those belonging to opponents and ved. org.) at the HAC level will simply be ignored. Therefore, it is necessary to write to the Higher Attestation Commission. This is often difficult and unpleasant, but if you have defended an ugly dissertation , you need to write it. Moreover, it would be nice if the letters came from different people and different organizations - this immediately removes questions of personal hostility, etc.And here it is not so important what the status is - two letters from candidates from different institutions are better than one from an academician.
K. Makarov

There were 22 positive reviews and 7 negative ones. technically, everything was pretty clean. I defended myself and thank God.

Three more negative reviews, plus that – and he wouldn't have defended himself. Last year, this situation was in the BPI FEB RAS-defended a doctoral thesis on whales, and there was a re-vote, a little more than a third of the council against both times – and that's it, for life does not have the right to defend on this topic. Dissertation and science are somewhat different things. Someone does not have a degree and is an excellent specialist, and someone is a doctor-and does not understand anything. It is good when a person has a degree and is conscientiously engaged in science.

returns an error

Here is the abstract

Let's discuss this "creativity".

This post was edited by Thanatophilus - 02/21/2011 19: 52

File/s:



 SigidaRS.doc

size: 2.71 mb
number of downloads: 1881

Well, to begin with, for the sake of objectivity, it should be noted that the author of the abstract downplayed the number of his VAKOV publications. IMHO publications numbered 20 and 32 are also published in publications from the list of the Higher Attestation Commission, since Vestnik Stavropol State University and Izvestiya Dagestan State Pedagogical University are also on the list of the Higher Attestation Commission. Although the extent to which the articles "Sources and factors of formation of ecological consciousness in students" and" Environmental training of students in the process of studying biology " are publications on the topic of the dissertation, this is a separate question.

Yes, many works are not about "bugs".

Here's the gist of it. Somehow, the AGTU council accepted this work for defense, and it was very successful. But people who respect science wrote to the council and the Higher Attestation Commission. Despite the defense in June last year, the Higher Attestation Commission has not yet made a decision. If anyone knows about this situation, please contact us. Will the Higher Attestation Commission approve it after all?

What does soil science have to do with it?

And for some reason it is no longer on the WAKA website.

This post was edited by Thanatophilus - 02/23/2011 15: 23

I was interested in a number of works on weevils from the Caucasus. Here is the list:

Mukhtarova, Gulnara Magomedovna Ecological and faunal characteristics and zoogeographic analysis of weevil beetles (Coleoptera: Apionidae, Rhynchophoridae, Curculionidae) Abstract of the dissertation of Candidate of Biological Sciences Makhachkala,2003.

Geliskhanova, Sofya Bisoltovna Ecological and faunal characteristics and zoogeographic analysis of weevil beetles (Coleoptera: Apionidae, Rhynchophridae, Curculionidae) Targim and Dzheyrakh arid basins of Ingushetia. Abstract of Candidate of Biological Sciences ' dissertation Makhachkala, 2006.

Ismailova, Madina Sheikhovna Weevil beetles (Coleoptera: Apionidae, Nanophyidae, Brachyceridae, Dryophthoridae, Erirhinidae, Curculionidae) Severo-Vostochnogo Kavkaza: fauna, ekologiya, zoogeografiya avtoreferat dis. doktora biologicheskikh nauk Makhachkala, 2007.

Efendieva, Sabina Sultanovna. Apionidae of Dagestan: species composition, ecological and biological features, zoogeography: abstract of the PhD thesis. Makhachkala, 2009

Talibova, Samira Eflyatdinovna: Beetles-weevils of Southern Dagestan: ecological and geographical analysis. abstract of the thesis of Candidate of Biological Sciences. Makhachkala, 2009

Most likely all or most of the work was done under the supervision of G. M. Abdurakhmanov. It seems unusual to me - a whole series of papers on one group and even a doctoral dissertation. Who is familiar with the situation in the DSU and can answer how reliable the work is. Just in case: this is not an accusation against the authors of anything ))

And who at least watched Sigida's abstract?

About ground beetles. Personally, I was interested in heated glass tubes, according to the distribution in which (that is, temperature) beetles were distributed according to their physiology.

And who collected so many beetles - there are numbers of 35,000 or 45,000? Isn't that a lot for ground beetles?

I was wondering if such scientific works do not destroy nature.

What do you like about VAK gossip and reviews? Are you interested in gossip or the quality of your work?

I looked at a couple of top doctoral abstracts. The quality of the work fairly accurately reflects the list of publications of the author. In principle, the rest was no longer necessary not to watch. If a candidate for a doctor does not have a single publication in English, in a foreign journal, and the list of supposedly peer-reviewed journals from the list of the Higher Attestation Commission consists mainly of bulletin of Zapupyrinsky universities... (a couple of articles in a Zoozhurnal, which is still a swamp, do not save the situation). Then this is not a doctor, but a cynical crook. Whatever their motives.

And who at least watched Sigida's abstract?

About ground beetles. Personally, I was interested in heated glass tubes, according to the distribution in which (that is, temperature) beetles were distributed according to their physiology.

And who collected so many beetles - there are numbers of 35,000 or 45,000? Isn't that a lot for ground beetles?

I was wondering if such scientific works do not destroy nature.

What do you like about VAK gossip and reviews? Are you interested in gossip or the quality of your work?

The quality of the work is interesting. And gossip is not what is meant by this word - these are the opinions of at least 10 authoritative doctors of science who answered in VAK

Can't you have your own opinion? It must be your own personal opinion, grandmothers, regardless of the opinion of 1001 doctors of science. Yastno?

Anyone can have an opinion. I personally found the work quite similar to a doctorate in terms of labor intensity. Or am I wrong - how much can you collect 45 thousand ground beetles for?

Or can the author be classified as a fighter of nature and ban such doctorates?

Although I'm a complete layman in insects, but this is IMHO just from a scientific point of view.

there is such a phrase as "singing cowards"...
In this case of course it can't be and they are all excellent scientists!

And the texts would be worth reading, because often they are so globally meaningless that everything will become clear anyway. And check for the availability of the material. Well, if there is one.

PS: There is an opinion that citizens of some countries should be banned from studying science, as a subject of Western civilization that does not correspond to their capabilities.

Hmm, I also downloaded the abstract from Thanatophilus. I want to say my strong opinion - I would definitely not give a positive review to this work. Why, yes, because there is not a single mention of coppers! How was it possible to catch 33,000 ground beetles and not find a single copper coin?. This is some kind of thing ... shame on you!
Although the work was carried out in the right direction, it would be enough to catch another 50,000 ground beetles, conduct additional experiments, and find two or three coppers... And the work will be worthy of protection )))


"PS: There is an opinion that citizens of some countries should be banned from studying science, as a subject of Western civilization that does not correspond to their capabilities."

Interesting opinion, but why be so specific? I think it's better that way:

"PS: There is an opinion that citizens of some countries should be banned from studying science, as a subject that does not correspond to their capabilities."

Science was born on the nourishing soil of the riches of the Church in the Middle Ages, and rose on the investments of specific people in the period of enlightenment. Then science fell into the strong hands of the state, which directed it "where it should be", and now it has fallen out again, or rather it was thrown out, and it's not for nothing that probably If this abstract was full of cladograms and lists of sequenced genomes, then probably the reviews would be the most sublime, well, or at worst- a list of"new to science" species.
And bioecology is of course full of goosebumps )))

What kind of science, such and work. "It's just that they are all satisfied with it" (c) The cycle of freeze-dried exoskeletons and rapid "speciation" within the framework of the ICZN - this is the most popular ideal of science