Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience

William Seger

(11,733 posts)

5. Editor apparently hoodwinked by pseudosciencey bullshit

Fri Sep 2, 2016, 10:56 AM

Sep 2016

NOTE FROM THE EDITORS
This feature is somewhat different from our usual purely scientific articles, in that it contains some speculation. However, given the timing and the importance of the issue, we consider that this feature is sufficiently technical and interesting to merit publication for our readers. Obviously, the content of this article is the responsibility of the authors.

The editor may have thought the article was "sufficiently technical" since it came from two retired professors and a mechanical engineer, but none of the authors have any actual training or experience in structural mechanics. On the other hand, qualified experts have refuted their technical arguments for years, as the editor would have found with a little research, using both real science and common sense. I predict that the technical feedback on this article will be brutal enough that the editor apologizes for publishing it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How credible is this European group? [View all] Archae Sep 2016 OP

They obviously have no idea how much prep work is involved Warpy Sep 2016 #1

It's not a European group William Seger Sep 2016 #2

Oh, for Christ's sake. I know only a tiny bit about such things, PoindexterOglethorpe Sep 2016 #3

I figured this, somewhat. Archae Sep 2016 #4

Editor apparently hoodwinked by pseudosciencey bullshit William Seger Sep 2016 #5

I think so too, just like Andrew Wakefield and his "research." Archae Sep 2016 #6