Peer review can be useless -- examples

[rickymooston]

Peer review ultimately does depend on the quality of one's peers. Science isn't a democracy. Reputation still matters and is established by a Darwinian process. Science is as Shermer likes to say, "from Misoury, tghe show me state"

The purpose of this thread is to expose journals whose results are suspect and in some cases downright fraudulent. People with impress credentiasls have published in some of these

Journals with an implicit bias.
Creation science - establishing that the bible is in fact 6000 years old and that a flood happened.
Ufology - looking into the question of whether we are being watched
Parapsychology - studying whether psychics ghosts and other such effects exist
Climate science - following the money -funded by industrial or activist groups with clear and present bias.
Diet and cosmetic journals - following the money
...?

Journals that just aren't well respected
- I don't have examples but they must exist. If you know some, please share. Ideas why they are poor

Articles that should not have survived the first round of peer review but were published in reputible journals

Go and havr fun. Be creative. The more a journal makes you wanmt to bang your head, ...

[rickymooston]

Creation Research Society
http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq.html

Published continuously since 1964
Peer-reviewed by degreed scientists
World-wide circulation
Scholarly articles representing the major scientific disciplines
Fresh perspectives on science and society as impacted by origins
Emphasis on scientific evidence supporting: intelligent design, a recent creation, and a catastrophic worldwide flood

CRS Statement of Belief <--- Bias can't be more specific than this?
All members must subscribe to the following statement of belief:

1. The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically and scientifically true in the original autographs. To the student of nature this means that the account of origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical truths.

2. All basic types of living things, including man, were made by direct creative acts of God during the Creation Week described in Genesis. Whatever biological changes have occurred since Creation Week have accomplished only changes within the original created kinds.

3. The great flood described in Genesis, commonly referred to as the Noachian Flood, was an historic event worldwide in its extent and effect.

4. We are an organization of Christian men and women of science who accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. The account of the special creation of Adam and Eve as one man and one woman and their subsequent fall into sin is the basis for our belief in the necessity of a Savior for all mankind. Therefore, salvation can come only through accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior

[jaimehlers]

I would agree that an organization that requires all of its members to subscribe to the same belief statement fails in a pretty basic way.  I certainly don't think its members can be trusted to peer review things written by other members, because part of the nature of peer review is giving people who don't agree the opportunity to comment and criticize.

[Historicity]

Diet and cosmetic journals?????????????????????

Please give examples of such and what peer review process they claim.

[rickymooston]

jaimehlers, that journal was at extreme but peer review by unworthy peers is totally worthless. You want peer review by peers who have reputations of integrity and who are knowledgible in the field at hand.

Diet and cosmetic journals?????????????????????

Please give examples of such and what peer review process they claim.

I don't have examples but I bet they exist. I bet there are other classes of journals where the people attracted are not the sharpest tools in the shed. The diet and cosmetic industries often border on the fraudulent IMO. They have a lot of money and hence people do "Atkins" rather than say following a healthy diet. Atkins may work at some level but I'm highly suspicious it isn't healthy.

[violatedsmurf80]

Parapsychology - studying whether psychics ghosts and other such effects exist

The well respected University of Virginia 

http://www.medicine.virginia.edu/clinical/departments/psychiatry/sections/cspp/dops/careers-page
http://www.medicine.virginia.edu/clinical/departments/psychiatry/sections/cspp/dops/research-page

here is a research institute that is funded with government money and a well respect journal for the paranormal
http://www.rhine.org/researchjournal.htm
http://www.iands.org/publications/journal-of-near-death-studies.html

Climate science

Is nothing more then meteorology

Diet and cosmetic journals

I too want to see these journals

[rickymooston]

Nice examples. The near death journal sounds like legitamate research. People have those experiences and as long as one isn't dealing with them in a woo oriented way, it can be legitamate research. That is, people having those experiences may require treatment and understanding the science of those expeirences is legit. Attributing said experiences to the supernatural is silly tho.

The university of virginia stuff looked suspicious  but their research may just turn out to be legitamate psychology. 

I like how they mentioned that "there are more qualified applicants than positions".

Its odd government money goes to thst stuff.

[Omega]

Reputation and topic does not matter that much
Any article on any journal can be fraudulent. and especially stuff related  with medicine

Most articles about electromagnetic radiation influence on human body are frauds.

Some reputable  journals just publish anything you send them as long as you pay.
http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/10/nonsense-for-dollars/

[screwtape]

Climate science

Is nothing more then meteorology

nope.
http://www.weather.com/blog/weather/8_7877.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatology#Differences_with_meteorology
http://www.suite101.com/content/meteorology-vs-climatology-a37335
http://nsidc.org/arcticmet/basics/weather_vs_climate.html
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/noaa-n/climate/climate_weather.html

and definitely click this link:
http://soundfxnow.com/sound-fx/the-price-is-right-loser/

[hypagoga]

Anyone remember this one? It caused quite a stir!

[rickymooston]

Yes. It was misrepresented in the movie Expelled.