Truthers finally are claiming that they got an article posted in a "peer reviewed"

[debunker9145]

journal.


"A team of scientists claim to have unearthed startling data from dust and debris gathered in the days and weeks after the World Trade Center towers collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001.

In a study published by the Open Chemical Physics Journal — a peer-reviewed, scientific publication — Steven E. Jones and Niels Harrit level a stark allegation: that within the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center towers lays evidence of “a highly engineered explosive,” contrary to all federal studies of the collapses.

I want to know by whom it was peer reviewed by. Every single one of the authors to the story is a major truther. Then according to Screw Loose Change, that Bentham Open Journals in which Open Chemical Physical Journals is apart of is “a vanity publishing outfit based in… wait for it… Pakistan.”

Also i have learned that it only has 2 volumes so far.
Here is a link.
http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/openaccess2.htm

[dtugg]

We hadn't heard...

[beachnut]

journal.


"A team of scientists claim to have unearthed startling data from dust and debris gathered in the days and weeks after the World Trade Center towers collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001.

In a study published by the Open Chemical Physics Journal — a peer-reviewed, scientific publication — Steven E. Jones and Niels Harrit level a stark allegation: that within the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center towers lays evidence of “a highly engineered explosive,” contrary to all federal studies of the collapses.

I want to know by whom it was peer reviewed by. Every single one of the authors to the story is a major truther. Then according to Screw Loose Change, that Bentham Open Journals in which Open Chemical Physical Journals is apart of is “a vanity publishing outfit based in… wait for it… Pakistan.”

Also i have learned that it only has 2 volumes so far.
Here is a link.
http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/openaccess2.htm

This is another thread already; you could look before you leap.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=139293 (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=139293)

Plus there is another older thread about the first time they paid to have their idiotic ideas published.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=110489 (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=110489)

So in a few minutes or days, if your thread is “gone”; it is really moved to one of these two threads already started.

Yes Jones paid money to get a paper of junk science published. His insane ideas on 911 are only published on the web, or in vanity press.

[AJM8125]

debunker9145? Do you even read this board?

[debunker9145]

Yes, so i did not see them. I am kind of half asleep. The same topic was already covered twice. WHy dont you get onto the guy who posted it second for not reading the board.

[AJM8125]

Yes, so i did not see them. I am kind of half asleep. The same topic was already covered twice. WHy dont you get onto the guy who posted it second for not reading the board.

Because TAM bumped the 2nd thread for a specific reason.

The first thread has been pinned to the top for the last four days. Have you been "half asleep" that long?

[debunker9145]

It was published in this journal somewhere around April 3-APril 5th. Last time i checked that is not 2 weeks.

[AJM8125]

See my edit. My point stands.

[chillzero]

Thread closed, as there are other threads for the discussion, and no way to sensibly merge them.

debunker9145, please heed your previous warnings, and take care to check for threads before starting new ones, and also make use of the following thread for comments that don't actually need a thread:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=126817