The failure of the universities.

If you go to those two sites, there is my first article of science opinion about photosynthesis.

www.nabble.com/Photosynthesis:-exothermic-or-endothermic--to5656730.html
www.bio.net/bionet/mm/btk-mca/2006-August/003267.html

Three years that article ranks top-five. Eventually I start my BlogSpot. Surprise, that first article was tied to me. And my “Photosynthesis” was sixteen in no time. Now, all these results are eliminated from a Google research.

It is not only for photosynthesis that I have thesis. Even if I am stupid on many points, theses I got. How? I got centiles. 96, 92, 91 for chemistry, physics and geography! But I am a weak student. I have a pierced skull, and that gives me a weak memory and a difficulty of attention. Worst I am suffering apathy. Either it interests me or not. I have never been able to learn my multiplication tables by rote.

Young I was not interested in studies. Instead I started my life as a monk: Pauvres de St-François. But I am not homosexual, and conflicts had aroused. I had a premiere formation in electronics and started a new career as sylviculture worker. Eventually I got a formation as technician in forest management. But curious accidents had struck me, and at my forty I was unable to work physically. So, I start my university. I was hungry for information. The problem is the university staff never checked upon my results of “les examens du ministère de l’Éducation”. They see me as a prey to get cash from. But they let me study for five years during which I have access to their books. My last session was a clash. They refused me the right to answer exams with different notions. I would have had, if so, quite a good number of theses then. So, I quit them. But I had had my vengeance; I presented myself with a copy of my results to the biology director. Things would have changed then, have I accepted to forget and to forgive them. I quit them.

The problem with the universities is that as student we have exams by which we are not independent of our teacher. With exam with centiles, we are independent of our teacher and our Institution. But other manner of exam may be devised. I suggest that the teacher that gives the course be not the one who does the exam. But that will not please the Institutions and the syndicates of professors. I suggest that at university level be two manners of formation.
Industries will not employ one with big formation. Once the job done, the researches, there is no need for big formation. You need big formation for evolving the situation but once it is established you lose your job. So, formations as technician and engineer may continue as before, but high formation must be different. A suggestion, universities may pay student for studying. For that it has to be for the elite; not cash elite but centile elite.

As for now the universities fail to produce sound theories. Worst, some fields are filled with bluffers. They bluff. When someone says ... if you are not Ph D level you will probably not understood.... they have nothing serious as theories. They are often stalled but they do not want to lose the face.

There is at the end of a session an evaluation. That evaluation must not be done by the University. It must be by an independent party.

Whatever you will do, as it is, it is not working. The Universities failed to produce sound theories. Sure there are fields as mechanics which are good. But the whole time you are there, the only method is to learn by rote.

To understand or to learn by rote; to be or not to be!

I will give you an exemple of utter incompetence. It concerns Capillarity and vegetal physiology. The xylem of trees may be considered as a capillary tube. It is presented mercury and water. A capillary tube in mercury will present meniscuses turning down, and the level of the liquid in the tube will be lower than the adjacent liquid. For water, the meniscuses will be turning up, and the inside level will be higher. With that, they are able to provide a theory in vegetal physiology.
All is false. Why. Simply, the concept of capillarity is false because it is incomplete. You just need a talc powder; this will make the water not adhering to the walls of the tube. That is water and mercury will act the same. No difference. Meniscuses turning down and a lower level in the tube.
So, whatever has been said with a false premiss is false. You do not have a sound theory about vegetal physiology.

Wildfires.

We cannot fight wildfires. It will only forestall the inevitable; you will get monsters. As for now there is the British Columbia of Canada which has experimented with controlled burns. I still prefer “prescribed burning”.

Prescribed burning had been banished since the year 1920. They decided they preferred large cut areas over light ones.

It is the seedlings will not sprout; the litter is too acid. You must have large areas for the rains to wash the acidity. Or, you burn your forest.
A fire, for a forest, is a Victory.

With gentle prescribed burning you do it when the winds have the good condition; that is the stability and the strength.

With harsh conditions, you must create lines of counter-fires. Make sure the fire goes in the good direction, and let go. The burned lines will encounter and nullify.

The mentality of being afraid of fires was a big error. The true problems may be the universities which failed producing Students able to understand what is at work.

With natural fires you have acid rains and global warming gases. Acid rains, you know the words. What is “acid rain” and what is the purpose of acid rains.
Your universities failed to produce someone able to tackle the problem.

There is no democracy in Sciences.

Fail to undergo the right conclusions and it may become disastrous. As to say, you have a worldwide desertification problem. With the better of the intentions, you have prepared your end. Worst, you believe in a global warming.
I have demonstrated that the oxygen of photosynthesis be exothermic. That implies a reset of many a science. I provoked the questioning about that. Now we will see if with new theories there would be new strategies. Someone has succeeded healing a corner of the desert.
It is simple. They dig a trench, put some mulch and have a lot of planting. The level of salt in the soils has receded. Greening the desert, he called it. So, you have the strategy and must have the theory if there is to be better strategies.