People send me stuff. I got this email today with the subject: Publish Your Research Paper
And then I read the image that was the advertisement for the new journal.
Yo, I’m invited to contribute “resarch”.
Source image: http://isrj.net/prospect/isrj.jpg
You’d think they’d have somebody proofread this before sending it out via mass email. There were hundreds of .edu addresses in the email I got.
The website says:
All research papers submitted to the journal will be double – blind peer reviewed referred by members of the editorial Board readers will include investigator in universities, research institutes government and industry with research interest in the general subjects.
Hmm, seems nobody peer reviewed their mailing.
But, I wonder if they do any actual peer review, or if this is simply another “pay for play” fake journal.
Read the Dodge Geez’ comment above. The lousy grammar is deliberate, a filter to target only the suckeriest of suckers, willing to go at least a few rounds of pre-pay publicating.
Sorry, that’s BS. Multiple misspellings of the same word is just ignorance and laziness.
Most native English speakers communicate outside the rules because they’re lazy (using “there’s” or “here’s” when they should be using “there are” or “here are”, for example)
Indians are masters at business deals. Collect money from “contributors” and sell online with low overhead by publish digitally. The peer reviewers may actually be blind.
Phil Jones once wrote:
“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
Maybe this is their redefinition of peer-review literature? It surely passes the test of sloppiness and money-driven motives which are so indissoluble connected to most agw-science.
There are a lot of new journals and societies for publishing alternative hypotheses. However:
1. Alternative science is such a freak show. To hear any of these movements criticize “mainstream science” for not upholding or using scientific standards is beyond incredible irony. They are adept at pointing to the speck in someone else’s eye, and psychoanalyze your resistance to “truth.”
2. Many of the alternative science sites, if you look carefully at their mission/about statements, are political advocacy groups for “sustainability” and “the problems of world governance.” So it is not so “alternative” after all.
Why do they use Yahoo mail and Gmail when they have a website?
To Steve C.:
English was once memorably described thusly:
This was stated by the late science fiction author H. Beam Piper.
I cannot wait for the published peer-reviewed study proving that one-half of the US warming record is specious.
SEEMS FAIRLY PRACTICLE TO ME.