Nice example of peer "review" process gone bezerk!
Undermines credibility of:
- the reviewers of the paper (yes! your recommendations and or suggestions do count!)
- the editor of the journal (yes! you have final responsibility!)
- Plos One itself as a "scientific" journal (yes! you are to be accounted for what you publish in academia!)
- review process as a concept (unfortunately, you have these BS journals that publish anything!).
I would be embarrassed...
Histian Aaland - 8 years ago
Send the paper through an unguided process where each letter is subject to random changes. Not only would the mistake be corrected, the paper would improve. It is absolutely safe to say that those who believe otherwise are either ignorant, stupid or insane.
Albert Gjedde - 8 years ago
The only reasonable course is to do nothing. A reference to the "Creator" is not per se religious, as no one knows who or what it is, or whether the universe underwent creation in the first place, or always existed (the origin of time at the moment of the Big Bang notwithstanding), but a process of evolution did at least start when life began, and it is perfectly acceptable to call this process "the Creator" (of life forms for example) in the absence of any firm knowledge of how life really came to pass.
Nice example of peer "review" process gone bezerk!
Undermines credibility of:
- the reviewers of the paper (yes! your recommendations and or suggestions do count!)
- the editor of the journal (yes! you have final responsibility!)
- Plos One itself as a "scientific" journal (yes! you are to be accounted for what you publish in academia!)
- review process as a concept (unfortunately, you have these BS journals that publish anything!).
I would be embarrassed...
Send the paper through an unguided process where each letter is subject to random changes. Not only would the mistake be corrected, the paper would improve. It is absolutely safe to say that those who believe otherwise are either ignorant, stupid or insane.
The only reasonable course is to do nothing. A reference to the "Creator" is not per se religious, as no one knows who or what it is, or whether the universe underwent creation in the first place, or always existed (the origin of time at the moment of the Big Bang notwithstanding), but a process of evolution did at least start when life began, and it is perfectly acceptable to call this process "the Creator" (of life forms for example) in the absence of any firm knowledge of how life really came to pass.