I submitted a rebuttal that was summarily (but not surprisingly) rejected. I understand they have yet to publish any correspondence on the editorial. So for those who are interested, here is the text of my rebuttal. 1/https://twitter.com/nature/status/1064694083090812928 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @FondOfBeetles @primalpoly
I'm a layman. Would it be fair for me to regard everything in
@nature as, at the very least, highly suspect especially when there are political implications involved?3 replies 1 retweet 16 likes -
Replying to @Serenitynow418 @FondOfBeetles and
My impression is that the research is still pretty solid, but their editorials have gotten increasingly political. Anybody care to rebut this impression?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @unstoppablewom2 @FondOfBeetles and
I assume there is at least some overlap between who chooses the editorials and the research to publish. If there were an editorial saying we should take the ancient aliens theory seriously, the entire journal should take a hit, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Serenitynow418 @unstoppablewom2 and
It’s worrying that when you submit a manuscript (to any journal), the editor whose desk it lands on may reject outright for personal political reasons.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yep. The only paper I ever submitted to Nature, about ovulatory cycle effects on tip earnings by lap-dancers, was rejected in about 2.5 hours flat.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.