April 1, 2011

Is it just me, or have the “Trends in Fuckeology” review journals turned to complete utter shitte? I looke at the tables of contents, and I am almost always all like, “Who the fucke gives a fucken fucke about this pointless bullshitte, and who the fucken fucke are these mopes writing about itte?”


8 Responses to “Q”

  1. Spiny Norman Says:

    Maybe it’s not the journals that have changed, CPP.

  2. Ernest Says:

    Question: Where is the fuckeology at Webster?

  3. Nat Says:


    I can remember quite often getting stuff from TINS, or TIPS, back in the pre-pdf days (cause they had that annoying fucking long format that was a pain to fit on the copier).

    But I can’t remember the last thing from the TOC that enticed me to check it out.

  4. DrugMonkey Says:

    Why are you so harsh, jizhelm? Where else would the rumpsniffers get their ideas?

  5. jc Says:

    AHAHAHA. as I’m working on a paper to submit to Trends In Blah Dee Dah. Dude, high IF. just sayin’

  6. cackleofradness Says:

    Yeah. I’m thinking about a Trends in Yuckity Muck. You know, that whole h-index bidness.

  7. K Says:

    Totally unrelated, but this mailing list I’m on has this person who has an electro rig and they say “I noticed some 2343 pico-fortnight pulses in a random fashion on there, is this signal or noise?”

    In response my thought is “Hoofbeats, horses, zebras, etc.”

    Attempting to figure out whether they have considered that their rig may have a wee hardware/software problem.

  8. MaryK Says:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: