So… the back story here was that the article was done to highlight fake news or something. I forget which, but it wasn’t… you know… somebody’s lunch stuck on Webb’s sensors. (That… that would be awkward…)
I love it when anyone in academia calls out the BS double standard peer review is. A favorite one being the horrible outbreak of a medical condition known as Cello Scrotum.
Peer review is miniboss. That paper wouldn’t have survived final boss - as many replication studies as it takes to prove it false. Which is probably only few.
So… the back story here was that the article was done to highlight fake news or something. I forget which, but it wasn’t… you know… somebody’s lunch stuck on Webb’s sensors. (That… that would be awkward…)
I love it when anyone in academia calls out the BS double standard peer review is. A favorite one being the horrible outbreak of a medical condition known as Cello Scrotum.
My personal favorite is Get me off Your Fucking Mailing List.
Figure one seems to only convey two messages:
Get me off
&
Get me your fucking mailing list
This is why we have peer review
Astute observation.
Nah, that is about predatory publishing
Those are good references. Very thorough.
Peer review is miniboss. That paper wouldn’t have survived final boss - as many replication studies as it takes to prove it false. Which is probably only few.