[open-science] Fake Cancer study published in 157 Open Access Journals

Fri Oct 4 13:57:33 UTC 2013

2013/10/4 Egon Willighagen <egon.willighagen at gmail.com>

> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Klaus Graf <klausgraf at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> > I cannot see what is FUD if an article clearly demonstrates serious
> problems
> > of gold OA.
>
> No, you are wrong there, I'm sorry. The problems are there, but with
> peer review, as the title of the article clearly writes. Worse too, is
> that some publishers (or better: editorial boards) that do not do
> their work.lay down the cause-effect which the paper does not
> show, and only suggests. That is called FUD.
>

YOU are wrong here. If more than half of the tested OA journals accept fake
science then it is playing down to speak of "some" publishers. As I said:
siege mentality which doesn't accept critics.

Klaus Graf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20131004/60c82d3e/attachment-0001.html>