Sure it could. And me auntie could pass as me oncle if she had ze balls.
Self-publication is no way to establish a new species son.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Bigfoot DNA
- Thread starter GT/CS
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bigfoot dna ed smith melba ketchum
- Status
Sure it could. And me auntie could pass as me oncle if she had ze balls.
Self-publication is no way to establish a new species son.
a bunch of people who work at the places she sent the DNA to be sequenced.
I bet they don't even know they are listed as "co-authors" IMO, if they didn't assist in the writing of the paper, they are merely people involed in the chain f custody of the samples and the data. Not authors.
This entire thing is done like a JR High Science Project.
Oh wait, I'm wrong, science projects have to undergo judging by scientists and such....
I bet they don't even know they are listed as "co-authors" IMO, if they didn't assist in the writing of the paper, they are merely people involed in the chain f custody of the samples and the data. Not authors.
This entire thing is done like a JR High Science Project.
Oh wait, I'm wrong, science projects have to undergo judging by scientists and such....
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
The last three apparently worked for Ketchum at DNA Diagnostics...Ketchum is/was always listed as the "head" of that company.
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
Purportedly.
How many believers will point out this glaring problem with the origin of the samples?
So much more the reason to self publish! Also, how could it be footing if there was no money grab?
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
That does seem to be her plan. Does she think everyone is daft?
The Shrike
Philosopher
We had a faculty member in my department a few years ago who published some stuff in one of those new, online-only, journals du jour from China. That in itself wasn't enough for us to fire her, but the fact that she included another faculty member as a co-author on one of them without his consent? That sank her ship.
I think the thing is edited by her publicist Robin Whats-her-name, so that explains much.
The Shrike
Philosopher
BFF is a bit slow, but it's working today.
OntarioSquatch
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2012
- Messages
- 1,783
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"
"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"
Last edited:
- Status