OS, look at the other article in the "Denovo" Journal. It looks like it was written by a kid. This is Volume 1 Issue 1. There is no peer review, she published it in a homemade online journal.
Denovo, the new journal is aimed at offering not only more choices and better service to scientists wanting to submit a manuscript, but also reviewers and editors that will be fair, unlike the treatment we have received. We furthermore have adhered to all of the standards set here in the link below, especially since the entire review and agreement to publish was done at the previous journal
Some interesting info:
"We encountered the worst scientific bias in the peer review process in recent history. I am calling it the “Galileo Effect”. Several journals wouldn’t even read our manuscript when we sent them a pre-submission inquiry. Another one leaked our peer reviews. We were even mocked by one reviewer in his peer review. We did finally pass peer review with a relatively new journal.
It took a fresh outlook on the part of the editors and their careful selection of reviewers with knowledge of next generation whole genome sequencing in order to pass. I have no idea who the reviewers were though I have the reviews. That was kept confidential as is the way journals handle peer reviews. That was only part of the delay and problems associated with publication though.
After this journal agreed to publish the manuscript, their legal counsel advised them not to publish a manuscript on such a controversial subject as it would destroy the editors’ reputations (as it has already done to mine). I have documentation on all of this drama. So, rather than spend another five years just trying to find a journal to publish and hoping that decent, open minded reviewers would be chosen, we acquired the rights to this journal and renamed it so we would not lose the passing peer reviews that are expected by the public and the scientific community.
Denovo, the new journal is aimed at offering not only more choices and better service to scientists wanting to submit a manuscript, but also reviewers and editors that will be fair, unlike the treatment we have received. We furthermore have adhered to all of the standards set here in the link below, especially since the entire review and agreement to publish was done at the previous journal"
Buckle up for hilarity.....DeNovo...a "journal"/website made up by people for whom English seems like a 1.2nd language, with website design by RansomNote.com... possibly by Ketchum herself/her associates. We are at, let's see...oh, yes: Vol 1, no. 1. Obviously a poor imitation of Meldrum's poor online rag.
Did you see the first "article?" Barely coherent. What is/are "speciese?" Is that a language spoken by people from Spece?
well, I, for one, am happy for Justin Smeja, who has a great future in circus sideshows as our first DNA-sequenced bigfoot. I wonder if Ketchum's co-authors are aware of that?
Some interesting info:
"We encountered the worst scientific bias in the peer review process in recent history. I am calling it the “Galileo Effect”. Several journals wouldn’t even read our manuscript when we sent them a pre-submission inquiry. Another one leaked our peer reviews. We were even mocked by one reviewer in his peer review. We did finally pass peer review with a relatively new journal.
It took a fresh outlook on the part of the editors and their careful selection of reviewers with knowledge of next generation whole genome sequencing in order to pass. I have no idea who the reviewers were though I have the reviews. That was kept confidential as is the way journals handle peer reviews. That was only part of the delay and problems associated with publication though.
After this journal agreed to publish the manuscript, their legal counsel advised them not to publish a manuscript on such a controversial subject as it would destroy the editors’ reputations (as it has already done to mine). I have documentation on all of this drama. So, rather than spend another five years just trying to find a journal to publish and hoping that decent, open minded reviewers would be chosen, we acquired the rights to this journal and renamed it so we would not lose the passing peer reviews that are expected by the public and the scientific community.
Denovo, the new journal is aimed at offering not only more choices and better service to scientists wanting to submit a manuscript, but also reviewers and editors that will be fair, unlike the treatment we have received. We furthermore have adhered to all of the standards set here in the link below, especially since the entire review and agreement to publish was done at the previous journal"
The Doubtful News take.
http://doubtfulnews.com/2013/02/ket...eased-problems-with-questionable-publication/
It's only 9:52 AM and I'm tired of this already.
If a bigfoot witness is convinced they saw a bigfoot then all this does is make a mockery of the experience that, to some, was a life changing event regardless of what a skeptic might think of it. The bigger insult is for someone to play believer and profit from it, do they not have enough sense to be insulted by this?
The Doubtful News take.
http://doubtfulnews.com/2013/02/ket...eased-problems-with-questionable-publication/
It's only 9:52 AM and I'm tired of this already.
DENOVOJOURNAL.COM
Created on: 04-Feb-13
Expires on: 04-Feb-14
HAHA
Here is a video of one of the beasts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=khHSX3ZYaKI
HAHA
Here is a video of one of the beasts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=khHSX3ZYaKI
Does anyone think Anne Elk's (Miss) theory on brontosaurs has a shot in this journal?