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

Klaus Graf klausgraf at googlemail.com
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>

More information about the open-science mailing list