90 Peer Reviewed Papers

[bofors]

Lets review the definition of "paper":written or printed document or the like,
stationery; writing paper, a newspaper or journal, an essay, article, or dissertation on a particular topic: a paper on early Mayan artifacts.

Actually Genius, the Journal of 9/11 Studies has 90 "papers" listed. Those papers are divided up into 50 letters and 40 articles. Please revisit elementary school for the definition of paper and basic math...or just stop being deceitful..

I expect more from a debunker than that, JamesB.
.

Thanks, I was just about to point this out.

This is a perfect example of where "debunkers" are so desperate to make their lost case, they refuse to be objective.

 

[DGM]

Thanks, I was just about to point this out.

This is a perfect example of where "debunkers" are so desperate to make their lost case, they refuse to be objective.

So you argue that the papers don't necessarily have to be accurate? Just any definition of "peer review".

 

[Par]

I'm suprised. You can't even call a fallacy correctly. Because my definition of Peer Review came from Wikipedia as of today. If you analyze Wikipedia's explanation of Peer Review, then the Journal of 9/11 Studies indeed qualifies for that definition.

That doesn’t have any bearing on the question of whether or not you committed the aforementioned fallacy.

Your bunk is still junk.

What does this mean?

 

[Swing Dangler]

SO your arguement, swing, is that if Stephen Jones tells us that his journal is peer reviewed, than that is good enough?



uh huh....ya that seems reasonable.

Oh, thanks wrt the avatar. The mask is not meant to represent you, but rather the truth movement (through their favorite movie hero) as a whole.

TAM

Is there a reading comprehension problem that you and CHF have? Again re-read the description of an authoritative source on "Peer Review".

There is no comprehensive source for identifying all peer-reviewed journals. To help determine if a particular journal is peer-reviewed, refer to the journal itself (either to an individual issue of the journal or to the publisher's web site) or to Ulrich's International Periodicals Directory (volume 5 of Ulrich's lists the major peer-reviewed journals within the "Refereed Serials" section). The Directory may be requested at the Reference Desk at Kennedy Library.Source: http://www.lib.calpoly.edu/research/guides/peer.html

CHF-Swing, if a Holocaust Denier wrote a paper and got it reviewed by other Holocaust Deniers in a Holocaust Denial publication...would you consider it "peer-reviewed?" Yes, apparently you would.

Are you approaching the level of genius, CHF? Again, the authoritative source on peer review...Kennedy Library

The Robert E. Kennedy Library, a unit of Academic Affairs, provides instructional services and information resources for student and faculty teaching, learning, and research.

I suggest contacting them about their definition of "Peer Review" as they are th experts.

DGM-So you argue that the papers don't necessarily have to be accurate?

Is reading comprehension a common issue with debunkers?

Read the definition again from Wikipedia. If you don't like the description, change it.

Peer review (known as refereeing in some academic fields) is a process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. It is used primarily by editors to select and to screen submitted manuscripts, and by funding agencies, to decide the awarding of grants. The peer review process aims to make authors meet the standards of their discipline, and of science in general. Publications and awards that have not undergone peer review are likely to be regarded with suspicion by scholars and professionals in many fields. Even refereed journals, however, can contain errors.-Wikipedia.

 

[LashL]

Frankly, anyone who argues - without their tongue planted firmly in their cheek - that Steven Jones' internet vanity publication is a peer-reviewed journal worthy of anything but derision is not playing with a full deck.

The assertion is ridiculous on its face.

 

[peteweaver]

The only papers Jones has ever had peer reviewed were papers on nuclear physics. He knows full well what the journal process is. He's just too much of a coward to submit his CT work to a real journal.

 

[Par]

Is there a reading comprehension problem that you and CHF have? Again re-read the description of an authoritative source on "Peer Review".

There is no comprehensive source for identifying all peer-reviewed journals. To help determine if a particular journal is peer-reviewed, refer to the journal itself (either to an individual issue of the journal or to the publisher's web site) or to Ulrich's International Periodicals Directory (volume 5 of Ulrich's lists the major peer-reviewed journals within the "Refereed Serials" section). The Directory may be requested at the Reference Desk at Kennedy Library.Source: http://www.lib.calpoly.edu/research/guides/peer.html

I see you’re attempting to claim that this quote is saying something like the following:

"If a journal claims that it’s peer-reviewed, then that means that it’s peer-reviewed."

Quite clearly, however, it is saying nothing of the sort. This, again, is typical of you. You are an extremely deceitful person.

 

[CHF]

There is no comprehensive source for identifying all peer-reviewed journals. To help determine if a particular journal is peer-reviewed, refer to the journal itself (either to an individual issue of the journal or to the publisher's web site)

So in other words you're taking Steven Jones at his word. That's what I thought.

Tell you what Swing - how about you show the "journal of 911 studies" to The Robert E. Kennedy Library and ask them whether they would list Jones' rag as being a peer-review publication.

Because I get the feeling that they're not talking about kook journals. They're probably assuming that there's at least some degree of honesty to a journal's claim of being "peer-review."

Now let me re-state my question to you: if a Holocaust Denier identified his paper as being "peer-reviewed" in a Holocaust Denial journal, would you accept it as having met peer-review standards?

If not, how come?

 

[Par]

if a Holocaust Denier identified his paper as being "peer-reviewed" in a Holocaust Denial journal, would you accept it as having met peer-review standards? If not, how come?

I think you’re asking the wrong question, or rather the right question but to the wrong person; I suspect that Swing Dangler would be somewhat inclined to approach the claims of Holocaust deniers with a disturbing level of credulity.

 

[CHF]

I think you’re asking the wrong question, or rather the right question but to the wrong person; I suspect that Swing Dangler would be somewhat inclined to approach the claims of Holocaust deniers with a disturbing level of credulity.

He either accepts Holocaust Denial journals as being legit or he betrays his own argument as to what a peer-review journal is.

He loses either way.

 

[T.A.M.]

No Swing, I can read fine.

You posted a quote concerning how one might find out whether a journal is peer reviewed. The point of the quote, is for those inquiring about an individual journal. the essence of the quote is this.

If you want to know if journal "X" is peer reviewed or not, ask the people who run the journal, or check Ulrich's periodical index (or whatever it is called).

This has nothing to do with what constitutes peer review, or whether or not there is a standard for such, or if so what is it, it is merely someone telling us how to find out about a particular journal's peer review status.

It does not help in determining if JONES is "Peer Reviewed" in terms of what most SANE PROFESSIONALS would consider "Peer Reviewed".

TAM

 

[SDC]

You are quoting from the Kennedy library at one of the Cal Poly sites and claiming that is authoritative?? With respect to the Cal Poly institutions, they are not at the top of the academic ladder. And from the phrasing, it's obvious that you are cribbing from an information sheet meant to be handed out at the reference desk, or copied from the online site. No one in the library field regards these as definitive; they're just meant to help the newbies get started. What are you, 17?? I've written the damned things myself and they have no significance beyond that.

Your argument shows complete ignorance of academic realities. This is outrageously pitiful, even for your usual standard. Please try harder. This is very, very sad.

(Yes, Ulrichs Directory is real, by the way. I know it well. That's a piece of my daily business. It's having trouble keeping up with the rapidly changing world of serial publications, though.)

Oh yeah, one more thing. Provide the citations for your quotes. You don't want to be accused of plagiarizing library handouts, do you?

 

[T.A.M.]

the quote amounts to this...

There is no catalog (Book) that has all of the special toys we carry in it (All Peer Reviewed Journals). If you cannot find special toy X (The Peer Reviewed Journal you are looking for), you can go to your local store (creators of journal in question) and ask them if they have the toy (a journal) and is it special (Peer Reviewed), or you can check our Christmas Wish Book (The Ulrich Periodical Listings).

TAM

 

[jsfisher]

And to end any further discussion of this not a "peer-reviewed" journal I submit this following definition from Cal Poly Library Services, Robert E. Kennedy Library...

Took the first link Google gave you then quote-mined it, didn't you?

I bolded the word, definition, in the above because that was exactly what you didn't provide. Allow me to use your source for an actual description of the peer-review process, not the oblique rhetoric that seems to fascinate you.

Many scholarly journals use a process of peer review prior to publishing an article, whereby other scholars in the author's field or specialty critically assess a draft of the article. Peer-reviewed journals (also called refereed journals) are scholarly journals that only publish articles that have passed through this review process. The review process helps ensure that the published articles reflect solid scholarship in their fields.

Notice the need for actual scholars doing critical assessment? Did you notice the final sentence as to purpose? The Journal of 911 Studies comes up lacking both on method and result.

 

[Swing Dangler]

He either accepts Holocaust Denial journals as being legit or he betrays his own argument as to what a peer-review journal is.

He loses either way.

CHF, is there a holocaust denial degree you can earn? Or are there credentials in a holocaust denial class you have taken? If not, the answer to your question is no. A peer review whether it appears in print, a combination of print and electronic forms, or only in electronic form, a peer reviewed journal is one in which each feature article has been examined by people with credentials in the article's field of study before it is published.

I have a few questions for you, CHF:
1. Are you antisemitic?

2.If not, why are you promoting antisemitism, CHF, in this thread?

3.Do you hate the state of Israel or Jews in general?

4. If you don't, why would you promote holocaust denial, CHF?

5. How do you know if Holocaust Denial Peer Reviewed Journals exist? Have you bee reading them?

If you want to tow the anti-semitic line further, I will have to ignore you. I would hate to do that as we have some excellent conversations, but your closet attempt at labeling me despite the facts is something you need not attempt as Sword of Truth has tried multiple times and his deceitful tactics have been reveled time and time again along with the fact that I do believe the Holocaust happened. And yes, I realize you don't care if I put you on ignore or not but considering the discussions we have had, I'm giving you an early warning in an attempt to preserve future conversations I might share with you.

SDC-Your argument shows complete ignorance of academic realities. This is outrageously pitiful, even for your usual standard. Please try harder. This is very, very sad.

I notice you type a lot and provide bizarre opinions.

1.Can you provide any facts disputing the library or can I expect another personal opinion statement and character attack?

2. Can you provide an authoritative source on the definition of peer-review?

3.You realize you haven't don't that yet, right?

Is this an authoritative source on the definition of peer-review or can I expect another character attack from what appears to be a 17 year old?

Applied Health Sciences LIBRARY
146 Library, 1408 West Gregory Drive Urbana, IL 61801
217/333-3615, FAX 217/333-8384

Q: What is a peer-reviewed journal?

A: A scholarly periodical which requires that each article submitted for publication be judged by an independent panel of experts (scholarly or scientific peers). Articles not approved by a majority of these peers are not accepted for publication by the journal.

Peer-reviewed journals can be identified by their editorial statements or instructions to authors (usually in first few pages of the journal or at the end), and also by consulting Ulrich's International Periodicals Directory, available online at: http://www.library.uiuc.edu/orr/get.php?instid=258215

Is Walden Library an authoritative source on the definition of peer review?

What is a scholarly journal?
Scholarly journals have varied characteristics; not every journal has all the characteristics and different journals have different values. Usually the author is a scholar/researcher/professor/expert in the field, the journal has some sort of review process in place and focuses on content rather than advertising, and it includes research articles whose audience is primarily scholars/researchers/experts.


What is a Peer Reviewed Article?
A peer-reviewed article must pass the scrutiny of reviewers who are experts in the field or on the research topic of the article. Source: Walden Library

Or how about Campus Library Lingo from here:

Peer review – When documents such as articles or books are reviewed by those in the author’s field of work. Many scholarly journals are peer reviewed. To be accepted for publication in a given journal the author of an article must submit his or her article to be reviewed, usually anonymously, by a panel of experts in the field or the journal's editorial board.

Does Dictionary.com have it right when they define peer-review as:

peer review–noun-evaluation of a person's work or performance by a group of people in the same occupation, profession, or industry.

Does the University of Nevada, Reno Libraries have it correct when they answer this question?

What is a scholarly or peer reviewed journal?

Scholarly and professional journals feature articles written by researchers and practitioners in a particular subject area. The authors often have particular specialties. Peer groups of researchers, scholars and professionals within a specific discipline are the audience for scholarly literature.

Peer review is a well-accepted indicator of quality scholarship. It is the process by which an author's peers read a paper submitted for publication. A number of recognized researchers in the field will evaluate a manuscript and recommend its publication, revision, or rejection. Articles accepted for publication through a peer review process implicitly meet the discipline's expected standards of expertise.

If you want to attack the Journal of 9/11 Studies, I encourage you to read this site and then you might have a leg to stand on.

 

[SDC]

SDang, it is with some pride and yet humility that I see I have goaded you into actually looking at a few library sites beyond Cal Poly. Comrades! (This is addressed to my fellow librarians.) Take care of this poor wayfarer; be gentle with him; he is new to our world of learning and information.

But you know, some posts back Apollo20 made the good point that the term "peer review" is being used here to excess. It's one key element in the constant argument and conversation which is the academic world, but far from the only standard.

The real point is that JONES is a bad joke. Don't bother trying to defend it. (Nature? You drag Nature into this? Oh yeah? Well what about its great rival -- NURTURE.)

 

[CHF]

CHF, is there a holocaust denial degree you can earn? Or are there credentials in a holocaust denial class you have taken? If not, the answer to your question is no.

As far as I know there's no degree in non-conventional demolitions either. So I guess that alone means Steven Jones' journal is crap, huh?

After all, the entire twoofer position on demolitions rests on methods that have never been employed before or since.

I have a few questions for you, CHF:
1. Are you antisemitic?
2.If not, why are you promoting antisemitism, CHF, in this thread?
3.Do you hate the state of Israel or Jews in general?
4. If you don't, why would you promote holocaust denial, CHF?
5. How do you know if Holocaust Denial Peer Reviewed Journals exist? Have you bee reading them?

Wow, that's pathetic. I'm using Holocaust Denial to put your idea of "peer-review" to the test, not endorsing such tripe.

Yeah, there are Holocaust Denial journals out there, such as the Barnes Historical Review - a kook publication that also pretends to publish work that has passed some kind of serious review.

If you think Jones' journal is an honest and serious peer-review publication then there's no reason why Holocaust Denial journals aren't as well.

I'm simply using your own "logic" against you, Swing. And you don't seem to know how to handle it.

By the way, wanna know how it is that I'm aware of Holocaust Denial publications? Because so many twoofers reference sources linked to them.

 

[rwguinn]

SDang, it is with some pride and yet humility that I see I have goaded you into actually looking at a few library sites beyond Cal Poly. Comrades! (This is addressed to my fellow librarians.) Take care of this poor wayfarer; be gentle with him; he is new to our world of learning and information.

But will he continue the journey? Or will he place the queries in the "too hard" bag?

But you know, some posts back Apollo20 made the good point that the term "peer review" is being used here to excess. It's one key element in the constant argument and conversation which is the academic world, but far from the only standard.

There are aty least 2 types of "Peer review".
Most people here think the formal one--submission to a learned journal, going through the formal process, and seeing print eventually--is the only one. It is not.
All of the papers and essays published on 9-11 have been peer reviewed. In the cases of Bazant and Zhou, it was formal. For NewtonsBit, R. Mackey, and others here, it was by qualified engineers and scientists who can follow the math and reasoning, and who have offered criticism and clarification, as well as back-up and affirmation (or suggested further research). Greening's stuff has also undergone the same review, and been found to be good (in the cases where he is a scientist) or doubtful (in his truther personna).
Jones, Fetzer, Judy Woods, bofors, et al, have undergone the same peer review, by qualified engineers and scientists, and have been found wanting. The fact that they consider their peers to be people of a similar mindset, regardless of actual knowledge and/or qualification, does not make them peers. It is the same process that made someone here redefine "Skeptic" as a wanna-be critical thinker, while a "sceptic" is the real thing, and to hell with the dictionary.
And while I wish I were a peer of Mackey and NB, my strain theory and materials science background is lacking--but my practical, practice, and systems analysis skills are not.

The real point is that JONES is a bad joke. Don't bother trying to defend it. (Nature? You drag Nature into this? Oh yeah? Well what about its great rival -- NURTURE.)

 

[T.A.M.]

OK, I'll admit it...

JONES is a PEER REVIEWED JOURNAL.

It is a journal that publishes ridiculous baseless theories that lack merit or fact, and I am sure the Peer Review Pool is full of people who are experts in "ridiculous baseless theories that lack merit or fact".

That is why I am astounded that NB's "letter" was actually published by them.

TAM

 

[Par]

Peer-reviewed journals can be identified by their editorial statements or instructions to author[/B]s (usually in first few pages of the journal or at the end), and also by consulting Ulrich's International Periodicals Directory, available online at: http://www.library.uiuc.edu/orr/get.php?instid=258215

I see you’re attempting to claim that this quote is saying something like the following:

"If a journal claims that it’s peer-reviewed, then that means that it’s peer-reviewed."

Quite clearly, however, it is saying nothing of the sort. This, again, is typical of you. You are an extremely deceitful person.