Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closecareer
Posted by Hapis_82 on 03 Mar 2016 at 16:08 GMT
I published three times in P One. Is my career ruined? Were the detractors right about the journal?
RE: career
paleosp replied to Hapis_82 on 03 Mar 2016 at 16:21 GMT
Ok. I am deeply sorry for you (in spite of not knowing what you published in this journal), I am sorry for all my fellow colleagues and friends that published serious research in this journal. But this was not the first time that rubish non sense (in this case, regarding the discussion and conclusion, in others cases, regarding a faulty methodology, sensasionalism, etc.). But, seriously... detractors? This is not about being a detractor, this is about somebody has to do something in order to fix the damage that this article made to the entire scientific comunity as DI guys now have at least one paper to spread their creationist non sense forever and ever. Again, I am so sorry for you and I can identify to your concerns.
RE: RE: career
Hapis_82 replied to paleosp on 03 Mar 2016 at 19:23 GMT
for "detractors" I meant people in the past that were seriously concerned about P One. People that said that the journal is not serious, and so on. As you said, this is not the first instance of a questionable article. People worried about the journal were right, then? This is what I meant.