Guest Shaun Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Why can't that someone be you Darrell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 ^I tried. couldnt get past the receiptionist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 LOL (for your delievery of your respsone) Darrell! That's kind of funny if you think about it. I wonder how many calls that poor receptionist has fielded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 ^Probably enough to be sick of the whole thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 3) Why cant somebody just call Ketchum and ask a simple question: Did you submitt a paper for publication and did it pass the peer review process? I've talked to her several times and in person once. I believe there is a paper in review on putative sasquatch DNA. The tone of those conversations has always been positive. I think any word on acceptance will be just prior to actual publication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 I've talked to her several times and in person once. I believe there is a paper in review on putative sasquatch DNA. The tone of those conversations has always been positive. I think any word on acceptance will be just prior to actual publication. Just to be obvious, I take this to mean that to the best of your knowledge, the paper has not been accepted for review at this time. Feel free to correct me! GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 (edited) Just to be obvious, I take this to mean that to the best of your knowledge, the paper has not been accepted for review at this time. Feel free to correct me! GK Ketchum said on her FB page before it was taken down that they were "revising" the paper, meaning that it had at least passed preliminary review with challenges. Edited September 8, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 (edited) or had been rejected. Edited September 8, 2012 by squating squatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Ketchum said on her FB page before it was taken down that they were "revising" the paper, meaning that it had at least passed preliminary review with challenges. That was a while ago now. Just wonderin'... GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nalajr Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Ketchum said on her FB page before it was taken down that they were "revising" the paper, meaning that it had at least passed preliminary review with challenges. Just curious as to how you know that it meant the "paper" had passed preliminary review with challenges." Couldn't it also mean that her and a couple of her associates read the paper before they were to submit it and decided that it needed work, maybe a LOT of work and so they decided to redo the whole thing? Isn't that scenario just as likely as yours? Or that it was rejected and they were going back to try and fix the problems. That would also be a possibility wouldn't it? Nalajr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 or had been rejected. No, that it was being revised at the request of the reviewers. Translated into "layspeak", that's: "It's pretty good, but there's some issues we'd like you to address before we sign off on this". That is not a rejection. If Ketchum for whatever reason make all the necessary changes, then it might be rejected. Just curious as to how you know that it meant the "paper" had passed preliminary review with challenges." Because that is what Ketchum said in one of her statements, and I have no reason to doubt her. Now that may or may not be the current status of the paper, but she isn't saying much of anything right now. So the last official word from Ketchum has to stand as the status unless and until new, vetted information comes in. Couldn't it also mean that her and a couple of her associates read the paper before they were to submit it and decided that it needed work, maybe a LOT of work and so they decided to redo the whole thing? Isn't that scenario just as likely as yours?Or that it was rejected and they were going back to try and fix the problems. That would also be a possibility wouldn't it? Nalajr Not based on Ketchum's own statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Just to be obvious, I take this to mean that to the best of your knowledge, the paper has not been accepted for review at this time. Feel free to correct me! GK To the best of my knowledge at this time, the paper is not rejected. I think it has been in review for a period of time sufficient to reject it if it did not have the impact value most Journals would die for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 ^Someone said pages and pages ago that the longer a paper went from time of submission, the more likely it was to ultimately be published. If there was nothing of import to the paper or if the study was flawed in some way it would have been actively rejected long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nalajr Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Could you post a link to the statements you are claiming that she made about the "paper?" I'd like to read those myself. Thanks Nalajr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 start at the beginning of this thread and keep reading until you find it. They're in here somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts