| Peer-reviewed creationism? |
| Thursday, January 24, 2008 |
Not that the Answers in Genesis wasn't creepy enough, it seems they are so desperate for acceptance, the same weirdos are making their own journal.
There is an obvious temptation to see how discerning their peer review is by submitting something suitably wacky, but I'll leave it to someone with more time on their hands.
Anyway, what strikes me as most interesting is that it's another example of a group shunned by orthodox science starting its own journals of an alternative reality. The cold fusion community has a number of publications that cater specifically to their view of the world. Climate sceptics have their own journals too. Now the creationists are joining them.
It's actually an age-old way of creating a false air of authority. Back in high school I came across another alternative reality of right-wing paranoids with elaborate conspiracy theories extensively documented in self-published books.
The fascinating thing is that, with their own publications, they can cross-reference to create long lists of references that appear authentic unless you really check them out. Believers in the cause are then only too ready to believe them, as climate skeptic and sociologist Benny Peiser learned when he fell for a fake journal article and circulated it in his newsletter last year. " |
posted by Roya @ 9:21 PM   |
|
| 16 Comments: |
-
You wrote:
"The cold fusion community has a number of publications that cater specifically to their view of the world. . . ."
This is incorrect. Thousands of cold fusion papers have been published, and all but a handful appeared in mainstream, long-established, peer-reviewed journals such as J. Electroanal. Chem., Fusion Sci. & Technol., Naturwissenschaften and Jap. J. Applied Physics (Japan's most prestigious physics journal).
Roughly 1,200 cold fusion papers have been published in these peer-reviewed journals, and 1,800 others have been published in conference proceedings and in official publications issued by the U.S. Navy, Los Alamos, BARC India, Mitsubishi, the Japanese National Synchrotron lab. and other mainstream labs.
There is one publication, "Infinite Energy" that used to run article about cold fusion, but it seldom does these days.
Cold fusion researchers do not have "their own world" in any sense. They are nearly all distinguished, senior professors, because the research is harshly criticized and younger people cannot get funding to do it. Researchers include, for example, three Nobel laureates, the late Director of the Max Planck Institute for Physical Chemistry in Berlin; the director of BARC and later chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission; Prof. Melvin Miles, Fellow of China Lake; three editors of major plasma fusion and physics journals; a retired member of the French Atomic Energy Commission, and many top researchers from U.S. national laboratories. Your assertion that such people have an unorthodox point of view is absurd; people like Fleischmann and Bockris literally wrote the book on 20th century electrochemistry. (They wrote the authoritative textbooks, and Fleischmann is an FRS and former President of the Electrochemical Society.) Their views are the mainstream, by definition.
Cold fusion is controversial, not unorthodox. It is mainly criticized by people who have read nothing about it, and who know nothing about it.
Our web site features a bibliography of 3,000 cold fusion papers and the full text from over 500 papers. I suggest you review this literature before commenting on the research. See:
http://lenr-canr.org
- Jed Rothwell
Librarian, LENR-CANR.org
-
hi, love your blog, visit mine and see if you want to reciprocate the link: I'd love to have a libertarian link from Australia!
-
I am starting a science journal for perpetual motion machines. It seem the main stream science journals in all their wisdom are turning a blind eye to this world changing technology. I'll call it: PM-Breaking the Second law of thermodynamics. :)
Keep up the good work I will link to you from our site at SecularEarth.com. Please feel free to use our new atheist quote generator, you can grab it from the Link to Us page.
-cheers
-
Hi Roya
This anti-science movement is retarded. I can't believe that they really believe in creation and Adam and eve myth.
I am an iranian atheist.
I like "A time for drunken horses" too!
shad bashi;)
-
I'm also thinking of starting a journal called 'Adam is right'... in it I'll publish loads of stuff concentrating on why everything I say is right and then I can use that as evidence to prove that I'm right.
It works for me.
...seriously, calling that a journal is an afront to my scientific sensibilities, just like calling religious opinion 'science'.
-
http://thomashawk.com/hello/209/1017/400/Johnny%20Cash%20Finger.jpg
for dawkins & randi and the rest of the so-called “critical thinkers”…
The *MODEL* of mental health:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBEbfiaZTfc
“Look at the ANGLE OF THE KEY….see that, see that….”
what a fucking idiot this Randi is…..a REAL CRITICAL THINKER…..
Visit:
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/3283/P0/
to see how we stopped James Randi’s fraudulent MILLION DOLLAR PARANORMAL challenge…..
watch carefully the consequences of Randi’s *idea*…..
For over 40 years James Randi Zwigert (is this even a REAL NAME?) has had total control over who and how the testing was conducted, yet despite all this he has terminated the challenge.
The ONLY REASON why the challenge was stopped is because he lost and refused to pay.
Apparently, Randi likes to break the rules when it serves him:
“14. This prize will continue to be offered until it is awarded. Upon the death of James Randi, the administration of the prize will pass into other hands, and it is intended that it continue in force. ”
Great force…..it’s over……
where is my MILLION DOLLARS, you LITTLE *NO-NAME* FRAUD
PS: Almost Forgot: Love the IRONY of the *BULLSHIT* sign over Randi’s ugly little head….
-
A-ha! Great site. Blog more. Please.
-
-
its seems that you stop writing
maybe you are busy with life.
but I hope that you update you blog If you have time.
Im so glad prsonally to see athiest out there especially from middle east countries.
kurdi Bexoa
kurdibexoa.wordpress.com
-
This is a joke. So the creationist now have their own journal. I dont believe you can call religious opinion 'science'. This is Diana from Israeli Uncensored News
-
atheists are evil and should all be burned to death for their insolence
-
Anonymous, I shocked and appalled by your attitude. Oh gosh, I am so indignant right now!
- Kay
-
I just discovered your blog and love it! Yeah these Creationists would make me laugh if they didn't have such power to put out nonsense like this. I remember learning about the Creation "Museum" (the museum part used very loosely) in the film Religulous.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4mZXfRMI0U&feature=player_embedded#
Savagespirit.wordpress.com
-
Falling for fake journal articles is a scary possibility.Circulating fake articles is even scarier!!
This is Ibrahim from Israeli Uncensored News
-
Is this blog abandoned? I hope not.
|
| |
| << Home |
| |
|
|
You wrote:
"The cold fusion community has a number of publications that cater specifically to their view of the world. . . ."
This is incorrect. Thousands of cold fusion papers have been published, and all but a handful appeared in mainstream, long-established, peer-reviewed journals such as J. Electroanal. Chem., Fusion Sci. & Technol., Naturwissenschaften and Jap. J. Applied Physics (Japan's most prestigious physics journal).
Roughly 1,200 cold fusion papers have been published in these peer-reviewed journals, and 1,800 others have been published in conference proceedings and in official publications issued by the U.S. Navy, Los Alamos, BARC India, Mitsubishi, the Japanese National Synchrotron lab. and other mainstream labs.
There is one publication, "Infinite Energy" that used to run article about cold fusion, but it seldom does these days.
Cold fusion researchers do not have "their own world" in any sense. They are nearly all distinguished, senior professors, because the research is harshly criticized and younger people cannot get funding to do it. Researchers include, for example, three Nobel laureates, the late Director of the Max Planck Institute for Physical Chemistry in Berlin; the director of BARC and later chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission; Prof. Melvin Miles, Fellow of China Lake; three editors of major plasma fusion and physics journals; a retired member of the French Atomic Energy Commission, and many top researchers from U.S. national laboratories. Your assertion that such people have an unorthodox point of view is absurd; people like Fleischmann and Bockris literally wrote the book on 20th century electrochemistry. (They wrote the authoritative textbooks, and Fleischmann is an FRS and former President of the Electrochemical Society.) Their views are the mainstream, by definition.
Cold fusion is controversial, not unorthodox. It is mainly criticized by people who have read nothing about it, and who know nothing about it.
Our web site features a bibliography of 3,000 cold fusion papers and the full text from over 500 papers. I suggest you review this literature before commenting on the research. See:
http://lenr-canr.org
- Jed Rothwell
Librarian, LENR-CANR.org