On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com>wrote:

>this is an article about research published in PLoS ONE, a peer-reviewed
> journal with a high impact factor (> 4).

I confess I've never heard of PLoS ONE, but maybe that is  just my a
reflection of my ignorance, so I looked up the top 10 most cited
(respected) journals in the field of Neuroscience and Behavior and this is
what I got:

1     Nature
2     Science
3     Neuron
4     Nature Neuroscience
5     PNAS
6     Journal of Neuroscience
7     Annals of Neurology
8     Brain
9     Biological Psychiatry
10   Cerebral Cortex

Dear me PLoS ONE doesn't seem to be there, but maybe its on the list of
overall most cited journals.

1     Journal of Biological Chemistry
2     Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
3     Nature
4     Science
5     Physical Review Letters
6     Cell
7     J. American Chemical Society
8     Physical Review
9     Journal of Immunology
10   New England Journal of Medicine

Not there either. Top 10 Physics journals maybe?

1     Science
2     Nature
3     Physical Review Letters
4     Nuclear Physics
5     PNAS
6     Physics Letters
7     Physical Review D
8     Europ. Physical J. C
9     Applied Physics Letters
10   Nuclear Fusion

Nope. How about Chemistry?

1     Nature
2     Science
3     PNAS
4     Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.
5     J. Amer. Chem. Soc.
6     Analytical Chemistry
7     J. Medicinal Chemistry
8     Electrophoresis
9     Chemistry-European J.
10   J. Combinatorial Chem.

I still don't see PLoS ONE but let me know when any of the above journals
publishes something about NDE.

> Nobel laureates have published there.

Did they say anything of importance there? A Nobel laureate once sent me a
note of little consequence, so what?

> with a high impact factor (> 4).

And for whatever its worth Nature has a "impact factor" of 31 and
Physiological Reviews of 37; and if a more advanced and detailed  ranking
method is used that makes use of recursion and gives more weight to
citations from higher weight journals than lower ones (for example, I'm
sure PLoS ONE has cited Nature many times but I'll bet Nature has seldom if
ever cited PLoS ONE) then Nature is the highest rank journal in the world
with a 51.15 follow by Science with a 47.72. And you're bragging about a 4?

> It meets all of your requirements for scientific respectability.

Nobody, absolutely nobody would publish in PLoS ONE if they could publish
in Nature or Science, but they can't because those journals recognize junk
science when they see it; and they won't even publish articles from past
Nobel Prize winners unless they have something new and important to say.

> PLoS ONE is a legitimate scientific journal.

That has never published anything important.

> The problem with this "incredible claim" meme is that there is no way to
> objectively measure how incredible a claim is. It's just an
euphemism for the status quo.

It is not at all unreasonable to demand a very very high level of proof
before believing  a experimental result that if correct would mean that
thousands of experiments performed over the last couple of centuries were

> I invite you to pause for a second and notice how religious you are about
> Science with a capital S.

 Wow, calling a guy known for not liking religion religious! Never heard
that one before, at least not before the sixth grade.

 > Except for consciousness, of course. How do you explain that one? (still
> waiting for your TOE, btw)

If I had a TOE I'd be writing my Nobel Prize acceptance speech right now
and not be blabbing on the Everything list; and a good honest "I don't
know" is a far preferable answer to a question than a bullshit response.

>> if so then you should accept the following bet: If Science or Nature or
>> Physical Review Letters publishes a positive article about life after death
>> before April 5 2014 I will give you $1000, if none of them do you only have
>> to give me $100. Do we have a bet?
> > Notice that if you make the bet less arbitrary, let's say "any
> respectable journal with a high impact factor and articles authored by
> Nobel laureates", I would already have won.

Well if you're that confident then this is a simple no risk way for you to
make $1000, hey I'm giving you 10 to 1 odds it's easy money!  So are you
willing to put your money where your mouth is?

  John K Clark

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to