About: Academy Rejection Letter   Sponge Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : 134.155.108.49:8890 associated with source dataset(s)

Scholar Oppius, Once again you repeat your assertions that Goblins have domesticated creatures of several species, including spiders and kwama. And once again I must inform you that the academy's journal will publish no papers making such outlandish claims without conclusive proof. You offer no proof for the excellent reason that none exists. Goblins are not intelligent enough to be domesticated themselves, let alone to domesticate other species. Your premise is ridiculous, your reasoning is flimsy, and your conclusions are insupportable.

AttributesValues
rdfs:label
  • Academy Rejection Letter
rdfs:comment
  • Scholar Oppius, Once again you repeat your assertions that Goblins have domesticated creatures of several species, including spiders and kwama. And once again I must inform you that the academy's journal will publish no papers making such outlandish claims without conclusive proof. You offer no proof for the excellent reason that none exists. Goblins are not intelligent enough to be domesticated themselves, let alone to domesticate other species. Your premise is ridiculous, your reasoning is flimsy, and your conclusions are insupportable.
dcterms:subject
lorebook
  • No
skillbook
  • No
FullTitle
  • Academy Rejection Letter
dbkwik:elder-scrol...iPageUsesTemplate
dbkwik:elderscroll...iPageUsesTemplate
Author
collection
Title
  • Academy Rejection Letter
abstract
  • Scholar Oppius, Once again you repeat your assertions that Goblins have domesticated creatures of several species, including spiders and kwama. And once again I must inform you that the academy's journal will publish no papers making such outlandish claims without conclusive proof. You offer no proof for the excellent reason that none exists. Goblins are not intelligent enough to be domesticated themselves, let alone to domesticate other species. Your premise is ridiculous, your reasoning is flimsy, and your conclusions are insupportable. The more unlikely one's thesis, the stronger one's proof must be to overcome disbelief. Offering no proof for an assertion as controversial as yours invites ridicule. And I am delighted to provide it. Do not waste my time with any further submissions except in the improbable event that you obtain conclusive proof of your claims. Even then, a witness credible to the academy must swear to the veracity of your paper and must be willing to co-author it. I do not expect to hear from you again. I wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors as a charlatan. Felicitas MalliciusEditor-in-ChiefSpecies and Speculation Journal
Alternative Linked Data Views: ODE     Raw Data in: CXML | CSV | RDF ( N-Triples N3/Turtle JSON XML ) | OData ( Atom JSON ) | Microdata ( JSON HTML) | JSON-LD    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3217, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Standard Edition
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2012 OpenLink Software