A NASA spokesperson has dismissed a major critique of the Science arsenic bug paper based not on the criticism’s merits, but on its venue — it appeared in a blog rather than a peer-reviewed journal. Apparently ideas are valid (or not) based not on their content, or even the reputation of the author, but on […]
Continue reading →Recent favorites, notables, and retweets: Down on the Body Farm: Inside the Dirty World of Forensic Science A good read from the Atlantic. History of Female Madness in the APA Monitor A bit unsettling, which is probably why it’s an important reminder. . The dark side of oxytocin, much more than just a “love hormone” […]
Continue reading →This shouldn’t be something that flu experts feel compelled to discuss sotto voce. If the journal has good reasons to sit on the paper for now, it should declare them. If not, it should get the paper out in the open so the data and findings can be examined and vetted openly.
Continue reading →