Our Own Buzz
| Lasse Lien |
While we are (eagerly) awaiting the definition of beaconicity, here’s what the standard scientific jargon really means (original source unknown):
“IT HAS LONG BEEN KNOWN” — I didn’t look up the original reference.
“A DEFINITE TREND IS EVIDENT” — The data are practically meaningless.
“WHILE IT HAS NOT BEEN POSSIBLE TO PROVIDE DEFINITE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS” — An unsuccessful experiment, but i still hope to get it published.
“THREE OF THE SAMPLES WERE CHOSEN FOR DETAILED STUDY” — The other results didn’t make any sense.
“TYPICAL RESULTS ARE SHOWN” — This is the prettiest graph.
“THESE RESULTS WILL BE IN A SUBSEQUENT REPORT” — I might get around to this sometime, if pushed/funded.
“THE MOST RELIABLE RESULTS ARE OBTAINED BY JONES” — He was my graduate student; his grade depended on this.
“IN MY EXPERIENCE” — Once.
“IN CASE AFTER CASE” — Twice.
“IN A SERIES OF CASES” — Thrice.
“IT IS BELIEVED THAT” — I think.
“IT IS GENERALLY BELIEVED THAT” — A couple of other guys think so too.
“CORRECT WITHIN AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE” — Wrong.
“ACCORDING TO STATISTICAL ANALYSIS” — Rumor has it.
“A STATISTICALLY ORIENTATED PROJECTION OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THESE FINDINGS” — A wild guess.
“A CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF THE OBTAINABLE DATA” — Three pages of notes were obliterated when I knocked over a glass of beer.
“IT IS CLEAR THAT MUCH ADDITIONAL WORK WILL BE REQUIRED BEFORE A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF THIS PHENOMENON OCCURS” — I don’t understand it.
“AFTER ADDITIONAL STUDY BY MY COLLEAGUES” — They don’t understand it either.
“THANKS ARE DUE TO JOE BLOTZ FOR ASSISTANCE WITH THE EXPERIMENT AND TO ANDREA SCHAEFFER FOR VALUABLE DISCUSSIONS” — Mr. Boltz did the work and Ms. Schaeffer explained to me what it meant.
“A HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT AREA FOR EXPLORATORY STUDY” — A totally useless topic selected by my committee.
“IT IS HOPED THAT THIS STUDY WILL STIMULATE FURTHER INVESTIGATION IN THIS FIELD” — I quit.
Entry filed under: Ephemera.