The corruption of the peer-reviewed process and the scientific & medical journals

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

Same here, so how can both set of facts be true?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

Same here, so how can both set of facts be true?

No you haven't.

It was one of the most prestigious journals but this ended when Covid came around.

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

Same here, so how can both set of facts be true?

No you haven't.

It was one of the most prestigious journals but this ended when Covid came around.

Opinion is not fact.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

Same here, so how can both set of facts be true?

No you haven't.

It was one of the most prestigious journals but this ended when Covid came around.

Opinion is not fact.

Glad you understood it!

Finally you've made some progress

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

Same here, so how can both set of facts be true?

No you haven't.

It was one of the most prestigious journals but this ended when Covid came around.

Opinion is not fact.

Glad you understood it!

Finally you've made some progress

I have always understood that as fact and the only progress to be made here is for you to understand it too.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

Same here, so how can both set of facts be true?

No you haven't.

It was one of the most prestigious journals but this ended when Covid came around.

Opinion is not fact.

Glad you understood it!

Finally you've made some progress

I have always understood that as fact and the only progress to be made here is for you to understand it too.

Everyone in this n other threads is not convinced whether you understand how science n the peer-reviewed process work. Having spent more than a decade in academia I can see where the problem is.

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

Same here, so how can both set of facts be true?

No you haven't.

It was one of the most prestigious journals but this ended when Covid came around.

Opinion is not fact.

Glad you understood it!

Finally you've made some progress

I have always understood that as fact and the only progress to be made here is for you to understand it too.

Everyone in this n other threads is not convinced whether you understand how science n the peer-reviewed process work. Having spent more than a decade in academia I can see where the problem is.

Are you really going there, bringing in ATS' mostly politically right/conservative leaning members into this? ATS is a conservative site, of course the majority will be chiming in with righteous indignation. lol you make me laugh, thanks I needed a good laugh.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

Same here, so how can both set of facts be true?

No you haven't.

It was one of the most prestigious journals but this ended when Covid came around.

Opinion is not fact.

Glad you understood it!

Finally you've made some progress

I have always understood that as fact and the only progress to be made here is for you to understand it too.

Everyone in this n other threads is not convinced whether you understand how science n the peer-reviewed process work. Having spent more than a decade in academia I can see where the problem is.

Are you really going there, bringing in ATS' mostly politically right/conservative leaning members into this? ATS is a conservative site, of course the majority will be chiming in with righteous indignation. lol you make me laugh, thanks I needed a good laugh.

it doesn't matter whether you are right or left leaning unless you think one is by definition correct and truthful just for being left leaning

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: linda72

The BMJ is the most prestigious journal and he is butt hurt that he could not make it in that one. You miss this most crucial fact.

Repeating this won't make your argument correct

Repeating your argument won't make you correct either.

I haven't repeated anything just stated facts.

Same here, so how can both set of facts be true?

No you haven't.

It was one of the most prestigious journals but this ended when Covid came around.

Opinion is not fact.

Glad you understood it!

Finally you've made some progress

I have always understood that as fact and the only progress to be made here is for you to understand it too.

Everyone in this n other threads is not convinced whether you understand how science n the peer-reviewed process work. Having spent more than a decade in academia I can see where the problem is.

Are you really going there, bringing in ATS' mostly politically right/conservative leaning members into this? ATS is a conservative site, of course the majority will be chiming in with righteous indignation. lol you make me laugh, thanks I needed a good laugh.

it doesn't matter whether you are right or left leaning unless you think one is by definition correct and truthful just for being left leaning

It doesn't matter out in the real world, but we are here on ATS where it is everything.

Im curious as to what your take on this Ted talk is…

Please watch and let me know youtu.be... a reply to: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3
Im curious as to what your take on this Ted talk is…

Please watch and let me know youtu.be... a reply to: quintessentone

I cheated and read the comments, this one applies here but with a little tweaking.

It's almost pretty much inevitable, in fact I'd say it's part of the pathology, that a crank will, at some point, propose that the reason no one is taking their wacky ravings seriously is because of "power", or because of corruption (as is the alleged case here).

I think this is a good occasion to bring out this quote from the late Carl Sagan, who chaired the committee to compile those golden records currently hurtling through the void aboard the Voyagers:

"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3
Im curious as to what your take on this Ted talk is…

Please watch and let me know youtu.be... a reply to: quintessentone

I cheated and read the comments, this one applies here but with a little tweaking.

It's almost pretty much inevitable, in fact I'd say it's part of the pathology, that a crank will, at some point, propose that the reason no one is taking their wacky ravings seriously is because of "power", or because of corruption (as is the alleged case here).

I think this is a good occasion to bring out this quote from the late Carl Sagan, who chaired the committee to compile those golden records currently hurtling through the void aboard the Voyagers:

"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

You missed some comedic gold in that lecture, and if I’m being honest that comment gave the lecturer far too much credit assuming that every word wasn’t a complete farce. The entire point being glaciers themselves are sexist. James Lindsey has many “peer reviewed “ papers that propose utter nonsense just to prove how broken the academic system is.

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3
Im curious as to what your take on this Ted talk is…

Please watch and let me know youtu.be... a reply to: quintessentone

I cheated and read the comments, this one applies here but with a little tweaking.

It's almost pretty much inevitable, in fact I'd say it's part of the pathology, that a crank will, at some point, propose that the reason no one is taking their wacky ravings seriously is because of "power", or because of corruption (as is the alleged case here).

I think this is a good occasion to bring out this quote from the late Carl Sagan, who chaired the committee to compile those golden records currently hurtling through the void aboard the Voyagers:

"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

You missed some comedic gold in that lecture, and if I’m being honest that comment gave the lecturer far too much credit assuming that every word wasn’t a complete farce. The entire point being glaciers themselves are sexist. James Lindsey has many “peer reviewed “ papers that propose utter nonsense just to prove how broken the academic system is.

Well a lot depends on who is doing the reviewing and their credentials and the repeatability of the science itself. I just think the subject of this thread is simply butt hurt because the top of the heap journal rejected him.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3
Im curious as to what your take on this Ted talk is…

Please watch and let me know youtu.be... a reply to: quintessentone

I cheated and read the comments, this one applies here but with a little tweaking.

It's almost pretty much inevitable, in fact I'd say it's part of the pathology, that a crank will, at some point, propose that the reason no one is taking their wacky ravings seriously is because of "power", or because of corruption (as is the alleged case here).

I think this is a good occasion to bring out this quote from the late Carl Sagan, who chaired the committee to compile those golden records currently hurtling through the void aboard the Voyagers:

"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

You missed some comedic gold in that lecture, and if I’m being honest that comment gave the lecturer far too much credit assuming that every word wasn’t a complete farce. The entire point being glaciers themselves are sexist. James Lindsey has many “peer reviewed “ papers that propose utter nonsense just to prove how broken the academic system is.

Well a lot depends on who is doing the reviewing and their credentials and the repeatability of the science itself. I just think the subject of this thread is simply butt hurt because the top of the heap journal rejected him.

You're mistaken - I 've already explained why you're wrong - Normal Fenton is a distinguished academic having produced over 300 papers in every major journal-suddenly n as long as the covid era started he was unable to publish anything- We all know why-

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3
Im curious as to what your take on this Ted talk is…

Please watch and let me know youtu.be... a reply to: quintessentone

I cheated and read the comments, this one applies here but with a little tweaking.

It's almost pretty much inevitable, in fact I'd say it's part of the pathology, that a crank will, at some point, propose that the reason no one is taking their wacky ravings seriously is because of "power", or because of corruption (as is the alleged case here).

I think this is a good occasion to bring out this quote from the late Carl Sagan, who chaired the committee to compile those golden records currently hurtling through the void aboard the Voyagers:

"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

You missed some comedic gold in that lecture, and if I’m being honest that comment gave the lecturer far too much credit assuming that every word wasn’t a complete farce. The entire point being glaciers themselves are sexist. James Lindsey has many “peer reviewed “ papers that propose utter nonsense just to prove how broken the academic system is.

Well a lot depends on who is doing the reviewing and their credentials and the repeatability of the science itself. I just think the subject of this thread is simply butt hurt because the top of the heap journal rejected him.

You're mistaken - I 've already explained why you're wrong - Normal Fenton is a distinguished academic having produced over 300 papers in every major journal-suddenly n as long as the covid era started he was unable to publish anything- We all know why-

And I've explained that his 300 papers were never published by the #1 journal at the top of the heap and he's butt hurt.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3
Im curious as to what your take on this Ted talk is…

Please watch and let me know youtu.be... a reply to: quintessentone

I cheated and read the comments, this one applies here but with a little tweaking.

It's almost pretty much inevitable, in fact I'd say it's part of the pathology, that a crank will, at some point, propose that the reason no one is taking their wacky ravings seriously is because of "power", or because of corruption (as is the alleged case here).

I think this is a good occasion to bring out this quote from the late Carl Sagan, who chaired the committee to compile those golden records currently hurtling through the void aboard the Voyagers:

"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

You missed some comedic gold in that lecture, and if I’m being honest that comment gave the lecturer far too much credit assuming that every word wasn’t a complete farce. The entire point being glaciers themselves are sexist. James Lindsey has many “peer reviewed “ papers that propose utter nonsense just to prove how broken the academic system is.

Well a lot depends on who is doing the reviewing and their credentials and the repeatability of the science itself. I just think the subject of this thread is simply butt hurt because the top of the heap journal rejected him.

Maybe, but in this instance 2 things can be true… he might be butt hurt and also correct in his assertions. while I agree with you to a degree I think what you might be overlooking is the loose guidelines that the term “peer” is referring to.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: linda72

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: CR4SH0V3R1D3
Im curious as to what your take on this Ted talk is…

Please watch and let me know youtu.be... a reply to: quintessentone

I cheated and read the comments, this one applies here but with a little tweaking.

It's almost pretty much inevitable, in fact I'd say it's part of the pathology, that a crank will, at some point, propose that the reason no one is taking their wacky ravings seriously is because of "power", or because of corruption (as is the alleged case here).

I think this is a good occasion to bring out this quote from the late Carl Sagan, who chaired the committee to compile those golden records currently hurtling through the void aboard the Voyagers:

"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

You missed some comedic gold in that lecture, and if I’m being honest that comment gave the lecturer far too much credit assuming that every word wasn’t a complete farce. The entire point being glaciers themselves are sexist. James Lindsey has many “peer reviewed “ papers that propose utter nonsense just to prove how broken the academic system is.

Well a lot depends on who is doing the reviewing and their credentials and the repeatability of the science itself. I just think the subject of this thread is simply butt hurt because the top of the heap journal rejected him.

You're mistaken - I 've already explained why you're wrong - Normal Fenton is a distinguished academic having produced over 300 papers in every major journal-suddenly n as long as the covid era started he was unable to publish anything- We all know why-

And I've explained that his 300 papers were never published by the #1 journal at the top of the heap and he's butt hurt.

You're mistaken again-which one is the number1 journal??

He wasn't able to publish anywhere when the covid era began- that's very different- but we all know why-