- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Scientists get peer-reviewed journals to publish nonsense based on ‘Star Wars’ to prove a
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:20 pm
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:20 pm
LINK
quote:
You know all of those peer-reviewed journals that “prove” man-made climate change is genuine?
It seems they may not be so peer-reviewed or accurate after all.
A neurology expert has unveiled a sting operation he embarked on to show that many of these journals will publish anything that is sent to them.
Using the names “Dr. Lucas McGeorge” and “Dr. Annette Kin,” references to “Star Wars” creator George Lucas and “Star Wars” character Anakin Skywalker, the neurologist was able to have several journals publish a paper he wrote on the fictitious “midi-chlorians.”
quote:
“Four journals fell for the sting. The American Journal of Medical and Biological Research (SciEP) accepted the paper, but asked for a $360 fee, which I didn’t pay. Amazingly, three other journals not only accepted but actually published the spoof. Here’s the paper from the International Journal of Molecular Biology: Open Access (MedCrave), Austin Journal of Pharmacology and Therapeutics (Austin) and American Research Journal of Biosciences (ARJ) I hadn’t expected this, as all those journals charge publication fees, but I never paid them a penny,” he wrote in a blog for Discover Magazine.
He called the manuscript “A travesty, which they should have rejected within about 5 minutes – or 2 minutes if the reviewer was familiar with Star Wars.”
He pointed to some of the absurd highlights.
“Beyond supplying cellular energy, midichloria perform functions such as Force sensitivity…”
“Involved in ATP production is the citric acid cycle, also referred to as the Kyloren cycle after its discoverer.”
“Midi-chlorians are microscopic life-forms that reside in all living cells – without the midi-chlorians, life couldn’t exist, and we’d have no knowledge of the force. Midichlorial disorders often erupt as brain diseases, such as autism.”
“midichloria DNA (mtDNRey)” and “ReyTP”
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:26 pm to RebelExpress38
Not the first time this has been done.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:27 pm to RebelExpress38
And now students can use these scientific journals as a legit research source for even more nonsensical papers! Looking forward to seeing these footnoted for at least a decade.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:28 pm to Sidicous
quote:
Looking forward to seeing these footnoted for at least a decade.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:28 pm to RebelExpress38
Peer reviewed means jack. Pretty much a glorified notary public
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:29 pm to RebelExpress38
can I get a pdf of the paper?
I have reasons.
I have reasons.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:33 pm to RebelExpress38
Holy shite
quote:
For transparency, I admitted what I’d done in the paper itself. The Methods section features the line “The majority of the text of this paper was Rogeted [7]”. Reference 7 cited an article on Rogeting followed by “The majority of the text in the current paper was Rogeted from Wikipedia: LINK Apologies to the original authors of that page.”
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:33 pm to texag7
quote:
Peer reviewed means jack.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:33 pm to RebelExpress38
Climate change/global warming is such a house of cards, yet the libs get all superior and butthurt when light is shed upon all the holes. They're about as brilliant as al gore and his fake movies
This post was edited on 7/24/17 at 9:45 pm
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:34 pm to RebelExpress38
Oldie but goodie from 2005. Was a scientific paper auto generator.
LINK
LINK
This post was edited on 7/24/17 at 9:35 pm
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:36 pm to texag7
quote:
Peer reviewed means jack. Pretty much a glorified notary public
Yeah, I mean the New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, and JAMA shouldn't be read by your doctors since it's all garbage.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:40 pm to RebelExpress38
So shocking.
It is well known that climate scientists play ball for funding.
I haven't been as shocked since Jim J. Bullock came out of the closet.
It is well known that climate scientists play ball for funding.
I haven't been as shocked since Jim J. Bullock came out of the closet.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:41 pm to RebelExpress38
None of these journals appear to be reputable. In fact, they appear to be predatory publishers/scam journals, likely run out of a basement overseas.
Call me when JAMA or Nature publishes something like this.
Call me when JAMA or Nature publishes something like this.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:43 pm to texag7
quote:
Peer reviewed means jack.
This story doesn't support your claim.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 9:54 pm to RebelExpress38
This is marvelous. Absolutely marvelous.
Has Loshy commented yet?
Has Loshy commented yet?
Posted on 7/24/17 at 10:00 pm to RebelExpress38
While I agree with the premise of this guy, the open access journals he chose aren't exactly peer reviewed in the strictest sense. This wouldn't have gotten through Nature or Science or Cell.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 10:07 pm to RebelExpress38
I think that is my affliction.
Damned midi-chlordians have got me spectrummed.
Damned midi-chlordians have got me spectrummed.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 10:08 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
Call me when JAMA or Nature publishes something like this.
I would bet most of the people on this board couldn't distinguish between these "journals" and JAMA/NEJM/etc
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News