Anyone read a really bad paper recently?

BilZ0r BilZ0r at
Sat May 8 17:47:37 EST 2004

fburton at (Francis Burton) wrote in news:1084052325.300111

> In article <b0561e71.0405080919.1759d113 at>,
> bob <rboehrin at> wrote:
>>I do not know.  All I know is that this paper should never have made
>>it through a peer review process.
> It's worrying that such glaring errors managed to get through the
> review process. Usually (or at least in my field) reviewers are
> like sharks trying to pick up the scent of blood!
>>If you are interested in the Rosen paper I can send you a link to a
>>place that reconsiders the issues and does the work correctly.
> Sounds like it might be useful - go ahead.

I second that!

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list