Thursday, February 7, 2008


Great shit has been going down at pharyngula since my last post. Basically, PZ's rabid and plentiful readers have torn apart the review article, which I discussed. On top of it being a terrible piece of crap, it turns out the bastards plagiarized parts of it! How big are their balls?! Seriously, you are going out on a limb to force your creationist viewpoints into a scientific journal, but your unwilling to take a few extra hours to word things in your own way? That's just laziness. We're fortunate that these people are, in fact, so lazy because it will help to stifle some of the claims which will inevitably be made by creationists.  I can hear them now: 'Extra! Extra! Creationist Research Published in Peer Reviewed Journal (it was plagiarized). Read All About It!(it's fraudulent)'

Anyway, I wrote a note to the Editor-in-Chief, Mike Dunn of Dublin, Ireland.  Basically, I said - in the nicest way possible - that I was extremely disappointed in the editorial board and its review process, and will find it extremely difficult to take articles that they publish seriously in the future because of this fiasco.  He replied quickly with a stock response, essentially saying that they are looking into the matter urgently and that "Clearly we hope to achieve an early and satisfactory resolution to this matter".  Fair enough.  But allow me to make a suggestion. When you decide to retract the publication of the paper - this is, without doubt, the only option based on the plagiarism alone no matter the reprehensible content - please explain to your readers how something like this managed to get happen.  Regardless of how embarrassing it is for your journal, please, please, please explain to us exactly how it went down.  It might just teach us something about the peer-review process, and its flaws in these matters.  If these two authors managed to take advantage of the system in order to inappropriately get their views published in a scientific journal, tell us how they managed to do it.  It just might help you save some face, but more importantly it may help other journals keep on the look-out for such rogues


No comments: