17-05-2019, 08:52 AM
I don't feel like all the blame can be placed on the university. The most unfortunate step is that Cheshire's article got through "peer review" in the first place. When that happened, the University's PR people reported on it by default.
Ideally of course this should have been a two-step verification process. But I can comprehend how the thing ended up on the university press release. But I cannot understand how this mockery of science got through peer review.
I once published a reviewed article about my master's thesis in a semi-popular magazine. Review standards were not very high, but still my first version was read attentively by four or five people and some of them were quite demanding.
With that in mind, I can't imagine a scenario where Cheshire got his abomination through peer review which doesn't involve either major incompetence or fraud.
Or does the Sphinx cause blindness even in reviewers?
Ideally of course this should have been a two-step verification process. But I can comprehend how the thing ended up on the university press release. But I cannot understand how this mockery of science got through peer review.
I once published a reviewed article about my master's thesis in a semi-popular magazine. Review standards were not very high, but still my first version was read attentively by four or five people and some of them were quite demanding.
With that in mind, I can't imagine a scenario where Cheshire got his abomination through peer review which doesn't involve either major incompetence or fraud.
Or does the Sphinx cause blindness even in reviewers?
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)