[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

RE: Feduccia: the same old story...

--- Ken.Carpenter@dmns.org wrote:

> As Scott has acknowledged, Feduccia's manuscript was peer reviewed. None
> of us know who the reviewers were or what they wrote. However, I am
> certain that the paper is better than the original manuscript. It is
> fine that you disagree with Feduccia, but be very careful that you don't
> become guilty of intellectual censorship. It is a fine line that is
> easily crossed.

This paper makes alot of a negative points about BAD - ok, fair enough. But it 
often too easily
brushes science under the convenient carpet. If it was peer reviewed, than i 
have little faith in
that process now. How can peer reviewing have been so poor?? 


Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around