Misplaced Pages

Journal of Cosmology: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:47, 25 September 2011 editDarkness Shines (talk | contribs)31,762 edits Reverted to revision 452409446 by Darkness Shines: You may not use a blog to call BLP`s cranks. (TW)← Previous edit Revision as of 21:05, 25 September 2011 edit undoWilliam M. Connolley (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers66,017 edits Undid revision 452410737 by Darkness Shines (talk) OK, so how about dropping the "cranks" bit, which isn't important, but retaining the substance?Next edit →
Line 38: Line 38:


In general published papers present original theories, reviews, commentary, and speculation. Also covered is analysis of similarities and differences between competing theories (] vs ], ] vs ], etc.).<ref name=about/> In general published papers present original theories, reviews, commentary, and speculation. Also covered is analysis of similarities and differences between competing theories (] vs ], ] vs ], etc.).<ref name=about/>

==Reliability==
The quality of peer review at the journal has been questioned several times.<ref>
{{cite web
|author=I. O'Neil
|date=7 March 2010
|title=NASA Refutes Alien Discovery Claim
|url=http://news.discovery.com/space/nasa-refutes-alien-discovery-claim-110307.html
|work=]
|accessdate=2011-03-07
}}</ref><ref name=DSDB>
{{cite web
|author=P.Z. Myers
|authorlink=PZ Myers
|date=6 March 2011
|title=Did Scientists Discover Bacteria?
|url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/03/did_scientists_discover_bacter.php
|work=]
|accessdate=2011-03-06
}}</ref><ref>
{{cite web
|author=P. Plait
|authorlink=Phil Plait
|date=7 March 2010
|title=Followup Thoughts on the Meteorite Fossils Claims
|url=http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/03/07/followup-thoughts-on-the-meteorite-fossils-claim/
|work=]
|accessdate=2011-03-06
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|author=L. Battison
|date=11 March 2011
|title=Microbes on a Moonbeam: Disentangling the Meteorite Microbe Claims
|url=http://leilabattison.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/microbes-on-a-moonbeam-disentangling-the-meteorite-microbe-claims/
|work=Science in Pen and Ink
|accessdate=2011-03-12
}}</ref> In particular, the journal has been accused of promoting ] and speculative viewpoints on ], ], and ]. Skeptical blogger and biologist ] said of the journal "... it isn't a real science journal at all, but is the... website of a small group... obsessed with the idea of ] and ] that life ]."<ref name=DSDB/><ref>
{{cite web
|author=P.Z. Myers
|authorlink=PZ Myers
|date=23 July 2009
|title=An Amusingly Suspicious "Paper"
|url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/07/an_amusingly_suspicious_paper.php
|work=]
|accessdate=2011-03-06
}}</ref>


==Hoover paper controversy== ==Hoover paper controversy==
In early March 2011, the journal drew widespread criticism<ref> In early March 2011, the journal drew widespread criticism<ref name=DSDB/><ref>
{{cite web {{cite web
|author=D. Dobbs |author=D. Dobbs
Line 48: Line 93:
|work=] |work=]
|accessdate=2011-03-06 |accessdate=2011-03-06
}}</ref> }}</ref><ref>
{{cite web
⚫ for the publication of a paper by ], a ] ], claiming evidence for ],<ref>
|author=R. Redfield
|year=6 March 2011
|title=Is this claim of bacteria in a meteorite any better than the 1996 one?
|url=http://rrresearch.blogspot.com/2011/03/is-this-claim-of-bacteria-in-meteorite.html
|work=]
|accessdate=2011-03-06
⚫ }}</ref> for the publication of a paper by ], a ] ], claiming evidence for ],<ref>
{{cite journal {{cite journal
|author=R.B. Hoover |author=R.B. Hoover
Line 72: Line 124:
|work=David Dobbs's Somatic Marker |work=David Dobbs's Somatic Marker
|accessdate=2011-09-22 |accessdate=2011-09-22
}}</ref>{{rs}} from "crackpots and charlatans". }}</ref> from "crackpots and charlatans".<ref>
{{cite web
|author=I. Musgrave
|date=9 March 2011
|title=Commentaries posted at Journal of Cosmology
|url=http://astroblogger.blogspot.com/2011/03/commentaries-posted-at-journal-of.html
|work=Astroblog
|accessdate=2011-03-12
}}</ref>


On 11 March 2011, in an open letter to the editors of '']'' and ''],'' Schild proposed to establish a commission to investigate the validity of the Hoover paper, which would be led by three experts appointed by ''Journal of Cosmology'', ''Science'' and ''Nature''.<ref name="Schild2008"> On 11 March 2011, in an open letter to the editors of '']'' and ''],'' Schild proposed to establish a commission to investigate the validity of the Hoover paper, which would be led by three experts appointed by ''Journal of Cosmology'', ''Science'' and ''Nature''.<ref name="Schild2008">

Revision as of 21:05, 25 September 2011

Not to be confused with Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics. Academic journal
Journal of Cosmology
DisciplineCosmology
LanguageEnglish
Edited byRudolph Schild
Publication details
History2009–present
PublisherCosmology Science Publishers (United States)
Standard abbreviations
ISO 4 (alt) · Bluebook (alt)
NLM (alt) · MathSciNet (alt Paid subscription required)
ISO 4J. Cosmol.
Indexing
CODEN (alt · alt2) · JSTOR (alt) · LCCN (alt)
MIAR · NLM (alt) · Scopus
ISSN2159-063X
Links

Journal of Cosmology is a peer-reviewed open access scientific journal of cosmology established in 2009. The journal is published by Cosmology Science Publishers and is edited by Rudolph Schild, a researcher at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.


Scope

According to its website the focus of this journal is the advancement of science. This is accomplished by publishing original theories and discoveries in cosmology, astronomy, astrobiology, and earth and planetary sciences. Contributions may cover multiple disciplines and sub-disciplines of biology, geology, physics, chemistry, extinction, and the origin and evolution of life.

In general published papers present original theories, reviews, commentary, and speculation. Also covered is analysis of similarities and differences between competing theories (Big Bang vs Steady State theory, panspermia vs abiogenesis, etc.).

Reliability

The quality of peer review at the journal has been questioned several times. In particular, the journal has been accused of promoting fringe viewpoints and speculative viewpoints on astrobiology, astrophysics, and quantum physics. Skeptical blogger and biologist PZ Myers said of the journal "... it isn't a real science journal at all, but is the... website of a small group... obsessed with the idea of Hoyle and Wickramasinghe that life originated in outer space and simply rained down on Earth."

Hoover paper controversy

In early March 2011, the journal drew widespread criticism for the publication of a paper by Richard B. Hoover, a NASA engineer, claiming evidence for panspermia, which proposes that life on Earth began on another planet, which then collided with another astronomical body, and the resulting debris carried life from the original planet to Earth. The journal dismissed the criticism as "a barrage of slanderous attacks" from "crackpots and charlatans".

On 11 March 2011, in an open letter to the editors of Science and Nature, Schild proposed to establish a commission to investigate the validity of the Hoover paper, which would be led by three experts appointed by Journal of Cosmology, Science and Nature. The journal said it would interpret "any refusal to cooperate, no matter what the excuse" from Nature or Science as "vindication for the Journal of Cosmology and the Hoover paper, and an acknowledgment that the editorial policies of the Journal of Cosmology are beyond reproach".

On 1 April 2011, the James Randi Educational Foundation awarded Hoover and the Journal of Cosmology the tongue-in-cheek Pigasus Award for widely-dismissed claims that he had found signs of life in Mars rocks.

Indexing

The Journal of Cosmology is abstracted and indexed in Astrophysics Data System, Polymer Library, and ProQuest.

References

  1. ^ "About the Journal". Journal of Cosmology. Retrieved 27 July 2011.
  2. I. O'Neil (7 March 2010). "NASA Refutes Alien Discovery Claim". Discovery News. Retrieved 7 March 2011.
  3. ^ P.Z. Myers (6 March 2011). "Did Scientists Discover Bacteria?". Pharyngula. Retrieved 6 March 2011.
  4. P. Plait (7 March 2010). "Followup Thoughts on the Meteorite Fossils Claims". Discover Magazine. Retrieved 6 March 2011.
  5. L. Battison (11 March 2011). "Microbes on a Moonbeam: Disentangling the Meteorite Microbe Claims". Science in Pen and Ink. Retrieved 12 March 2011.
  6. P.Z. Myers (23 July 2009). "An Amusingly Suspicious "Paper"". Pharyngula. Retrieved 6 March 2011.
  7. D. Dobbs (6 March 2011). "Aliens Riding Meteorites: Arsenic Redux or Something New?". Wired. Retrieved 6 March 2011.
  8. R. Redfield (6 March 2011). "Is this claim of bacteria in a meteorite any better than the 1996 one?". RRResearch. Retrieved 6 March 2011.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: year (link)
  9. R.B. Hoover (5 March 2011). "Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites". 13. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)CS1 maint: year (link)
  10. "The Controversy of the Hoover Meteorite Study: Official Statement The Journal of Cosmology, Have the Terrorists Won?". Journal of Cosmology. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
    The statement was taken down, but a copy of the original can be found at D. Dobbs (10 March 2001). "Journal of Cosmology calls criticism of Hoover alien paper a witchhunt". David Dobbs's Somatic Marker. Retrieved 22 September 2011.
  11. I. Musgrave (9 March 2011). "Commentaries posted at Journal of Cosmology". Astroblog. Retrieved 12 March 2011.
  12. ^ R. Schild (11 March 2008). "The Journal of Cosmology Proposes a Scientific Commission, Established Co-Jointly with Science and Nature, To Investigate & Confirm the Validity of the Hoover Paper". Journal of Cosmology. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
  13. R. Mestel (1 April 2011). "Dr. Oz, Andrew Wakefield and others, um, 'honored' by James Randi". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 2 April 2011.

Further reading

External links

Categories: