Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 It looks like you'll have to pay $30.00 to see the manuscript. http://www.denovojou...cial-issue/crrc Well, then I am guessing, that would be the "out" for the scientific community to NOT read this paper. Theagenes said: When this story breaks on CNN et al., it will make her and the BF world a laughing stock, at least for the couple of hours that anyone will pay attention. If it's only for a couple hours. For the most part I have kept my fingers quiet about all this over the last 5 years (I expect an award). Now that we are at this place, I have no words for what I am thinking... Not even sure I can type what I am thinking here - or should... From Melba's statement above: After this journal agreed to publish the manuscript, their legal counsel advised them not to publish a manuscript on such a controversial subject as it would destroy the editors’ reputations (as it has already done to mine). I have documentation on all of this drama. So, rather than spend another five years just trying to find a journal to publish and hoping that decent, open minded reviewers would be chosen, we acquired the rights to this journal and renamed it so we would not lose the passing peer reviews that are expected by the public and the scientific community. There are just no words... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 The Erickson footage supposedly shows that bigfoot wake up, and then stand up and walk away. Surely Erickson will release his documentary soon because he and we have been waiting forever. He was waiting for the paper to publish so I don't know why it won't be soon. That footage was filmed a very long time ago. Does anyone remember how long? I think it was 4 years ago or so. The footage better show it's face or it won't be worth too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 "So, rather than spend another five years just trying to find a journal to publish and hoping that decent, open minded reviewers would be chosen, we acquired the rights to this journal and renamed it" It is her journal, she states it right there. It is now. I just think it's important to note that at least she claims that she had no ties with the journal before her paper passed peer review there and only acquired it afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted February 13, 2013 SSR Team Share Posted February 13, 2013 She could have easily come out with a statement saying that she did not feel that the edits requested by the reviewers were appropriate and that she has decided to pull her paper from the review process and publish it as is on her website as a downloadable pdf, along with copies of the various lab reports as appendices. I agree with you, but i read the below as doing as such, from her FB page. We encountered the worst scientific bias in the peer review process in recent history. I am calling it the “Galileo Effectâ€. Several journals wouldn’t even read our manuscript when we sent them a pre-submission inquiry. Another one leaked our peer reviews. We were even mocked by one reviewer in his peer review. We did finally pass peer review with a relatively new journal. It took a fresh outlook on the part of the editors and their careful selection of reviewers with knowledge of next generation whole genome sequencing in order to pass. I have no idea who the reviewers were though I have the reviews. That was kept confidential as is the way journals handle peer reviews. That was only part of the delay and problems associated with publication though. After this journal agreed to publish the manuscript, their legal counsel advised them not to publish a manuscript on such a controversial subject as it would destroy the editors’ reputations (as it has already done to mine). I have documentation on all of this drama. So, rather than spend another five years just trying to find a journal to publish and hoping that decent, open minded reviewers would be chosen, we acquired the rights to this journal and renamed it so we would not lose the passing peer reviews that are expected by the public and the scientific community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 It is now. I just think it's important to note that at least she claims that she had no ties with the journal before her paper passed peer review there and only acquired it afterwards. I find that a bit odd.. So, the lawyers allow the peer review process to take place, but when finished, the lawyers step in and say, "NO don't publish this, even though the peer reviews are positive" - so she buys the journal and re-names it?? Why wouldn't the lawyers have stepped in before peer review took place? Do other scientific journals run papers by their legal dept's before publication?? I personally love how she blames this on the lawyers. I guess anything is possible but why would a lawyer (who is being paid anyway) care what a journal publishes.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Not for a Buffalo... I have seen Scottish Highland cattle that have a coat just like that. As a matter of fact- when a friend showed me a tanned hide off of one, I said, "Man- I wanna make a bigfoot suit out of that!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Is it the texture that is the same or the highlighted effect as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scout1959 Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I'm beginning to think that even a body won't be enough for many here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Help me understand something. She basically purchased "frontiers of zoology" and renamed it. was frontiers of zoology a credible journal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Is it the texture that is the same or the highlighted effect as well? The highlands have several coat colors. Some of them are highlighted like that. I think it's call brindle- like in the dogs- but "stretched out" because the hair is long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 was frontiers of zoology a credible journal? It hadn't had any papers published prior to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 We can never get a straight answer when it comes to BF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 ^ugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Is this the "Frontiers of Zoology"? I can't find a listing for a paper with "in" instead of "of".. http://www.frontiersinzoology.com/about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djj Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I'm beginning to think that even a body won't be enough for many here. A body with an unimpeachable evidentiary chain, respected and credentialed and unbiased scientific people working on it plus one or a family in captivity would do it for the scientific skeptics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts