Guest Darrell Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Would this report or paper loose any credibility with anyone if it was not published in an actual academic journal? Such as if Ketchum established a web site and posted the information there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) Have any of the posters who submitted samples to Ketchum had any recent contact with her? Are you confident the project is still alive? Can you say much of anything about the current status without violating your NDAs? Will there come a point in time when you will ignore the NDAs and speak out about what you know? Sorry to post so many questions at once. Answer any that you can or wish to! GK Edited June 28, 2012 by gerrykleier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Would this report or paper loose any credibility with anyone if it was not published in an actual academic journal? Such as if Ketchum established a web site and posted the information there? After all the hype? Absolutely for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Would this report or paper loose any credibility with anyone if it was not published in an actual academic journal? Such as if Ketchum established a web site and posted the information there? Yes, of course. It would immediately become almost meaningless. Proper publication in a peer reviewed journal of note is the only thing that will begin to satisfy anyone other than some extreme proponents, and certainly, the only thing that would get any sort of credibility in the eyes of other scientists. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 But wouldn't the content of the paper be the same regardless of publication venue, so that after an initial period of dismissal based on a non-traditional means of promulgation, wouldn't scientists worldwide be able to vet the study and find it either valid or invalid? Wouldn't the credentials of the individual researchers who executed and authored the study remain as impressive even if the results were published "off grid"? And wouldn't this vetting process serve as an analogue to the peer review process used by any given journal? Granted, it would be a baggier, much less efficient process, but wouldn't the cream still eventaully rise to the surface, if the results do turn out to be cream? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 I agree Chris. Facts are facts. Period. Facts don't change b/c they aren't published. I however would want to know WHY a journal didn't pick it up. Or rebuttals from others that have been able to analyze the samples or point out errors in her evaluation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 No, the paper wouldn't be the same at all. It would be without much credibility if it failed to impress peers and an editor enough to get published properly. Published in the normal way it would come with all the credibility that getting through the system normally implies. Everyone would be reading it knowing that there was something wrong with it. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 According to Robert Lindsay, she will get it published in another journal if the current one doesn't get it published. In other words, we will only see it if it's published somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 But wouldn't the content of the paper be the same regardless of publication venue, so that after an initial period of dismissal based on a non-traditional means of promulgation, wouldn't scientists worldwide be able to vet the study and find it either valid or invalid? I think the problem is that, unless the study is published in mainstream science, then it is not considered "good" , and won't get proper review or published refutations/ repeated efforts by second and third studies. It would be the perfect excuse to just turn a blind eye to it. We would be left with internet experts spouting how it is all hogwash with no true peer review or accountability to back any of that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 But everyone would also know that the "something wrong" might well be a timidity or over-conservatism on the part of the journal and its chosen referees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 I understand that peer reviewed publishing in an academic journal does indeed place credence on the subject being discussed. But if a journal simply chooses not to publish a paper, how does that TRULY change the facts of the study? By that notion, only a handful of journals would control all that is 'true' in the realm of science, right? If there are personal agendas by the publishers of the journal, there are TONS of things that these journals could surpress for a variety of reasons. I think if the work is sound, it will indeed stand on its own, even if it's written on an etch a sketch. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) But everyone would also know that the "something wrong" might well be a timidity or over-conservatism on the part of the journal and its chosen referees. With the average person being "everyone" I would say absolutely not. It will be dismissed as every other document or book written on the subject has been. If it isn't going to be published in at least a decently regarded journal it would be best to just drop it completely and not publish it. Based on what I see now (going dark, off-grid, less chatter), this is what seems to be happening. Edited June 28, 2012 by rockiessquatching Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 If the study is published in a main stream academic journal then no problem. However if not, in my opinion, there would have to be a problem with the study itself. Either the science, the conclusion, or source material is'nt right. If self published, as in a book or put into a documentary, then yes the substance of the study is the same but it doesnt mean the study and findings are correct. I really think she will do something like Meldrum's Legend Meets Science. Which is not a bad thing per say. But if a journal simply chooses not to publish a paper, how does that TRULY change the facts of the study? It wont, but you are assuming the facts are actual facts. Maybe they are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Only about 5-10% of all submissions are published. I wouldn't necessarily read into it that the journal is trying to suppress a study, it may simply be a case of a study not meeting their requirements for eloquence, scientific methods, or not be important enough for them to publish. In this case the importance is certainly there, since a positive result for DNA of a new species of hominoid or pongoid in North America would be very important. If the paper is ultimately rejected then it would likely be for issues of how the paper was written or the scientific methods used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 If it isn't going to be published in at least a decently regarded journal it would be best to just drop it completely and not publish it. Based on what I see now (going dark, off-grid, less chatter), this is what seems to be happening. Maybe, but I would think if there was money to be made, as in a book deal, that will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts