Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=utf-8 |
Date: |
Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:53:49 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Message-ID: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
It's unfortunate that a prestigious
journal could publish a study with such clear errors.
Science always looks for the appeal to large numbers of readers - and that means that not all of the papers are up to the scientific standard most of us expect from Science. When MT ST Helen's erupted, they put out a special issue. Some good papers, and some really poor ones. By the time I got to the end, I wondered why they didn't include a paper from a janitor comparing amounts of dust swept up.
I had a paper rejected by them, not for it's science, but because it wouldn't appeal to a wide enough audience. After publication, our paper had over 80,000 reads.
Full disclosure, I have had our work published by science - Feb 5, 1985 - in was doubly nice to have a paper in Science published on my birthday.
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
|
|