1) The paper "'Mitochondria, the missing link between body and soul: Proteomic perspective evidence" by Warda and Han was published on-line in the respected peer-reviewed journal _Proteomics_ on Jan 23, 2008.
As reported by Lisa Guterman in the Chronicle of Higher Education, this fine paper has buried within it a rather startling conclusion, just in time for Darwin's birthday. According to Warda and Han: "The points that show proteomics overlapping between different forms of life are more likely to be interpreted as a reflection of a single common fingerprint initiated by a mighty creator". That's right. Warda and Han explain their findings as caused by the work of a mighty creator. This astounding interpretation was first noticed, not by their reviewers, including one who "does a lot of reviewing for the journal", but by a biologist, PZ Myers. In his blog _Pharyngula_ Myers lays into the issue with the following choice words: "It should have been savaged by any competent reviewer. It's not to say it is a complete loss; there really is a substantial, knowledgeable core here, but it is pimpled with genuinely bizarre eruptions of unsupported lunacy that make no sense, are poorly written, and reveal that at least one person involved in the writing of the paper has an unscientific agenda that they were willing to interject into an otherwise sensible discussion. And it's glaringly obvious. The rotten bits leap out vividly, as if those sections were scrawled in crayon and dung, and I don't understand how a reviewer could have been unjarred by their inclusion, unless they were just rubber-stamping the whole paper unread." Alas, that "knowledgeable core" and "sensible discussion" was quickly revealed in an update to be substantially plagiarized, according to Myers. If you'd like to admire this 'train wreck" for yourself, sorry, you're too late. It's already been retracted. http://tinyurl.com/2o7ot5 [retraction statement] http://tinyurl.com/3amvre [Myer's blog] Guterman, L. (2008). Biology journal publishes paper that appears to embrace creationism. _The Chronicle of Higher Education_, February 7. 2) The helpful paper "A mathematic model for the determination of total area under glucose tolerance and other metabolic curves" was published in the peer-reviewed journal _Diabetes Care_ in 1994 by M. Tai. So what, you say? Well, as reported in _New Scientist_ recently, physics grad student Richard Taylor (writing as "Flip Tomato") noticed that there was something darned familiar about that model. No, it wasn't plagiarism. It was an independent re-invention of integral calculus (dividing the area under the curve into rectangles and triangles and calculating their areas). Apparently someone named Newton had gotten there first, by about, oh, just over 300 years. No one noticed, certainly not the reviewers, and 90 papers (New Scientist's count) cited what Tai modestly called "the Tai method". You've got to admire him for that achievement, but his math education, not so much. And ditto for the reviewers and for those who cited him. Tai, M. (1994).A mathematical model for the determination of total area under glucose tolerance and other metabolic curves. Diabetes Care, Vol 17, Issue 2 152-154. http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/17/2/152 http://tinyurl.com/34xdb4 [Flip Tomato's blog] http://www.newscientist.com/backpage.ns?id=mg19726432.700 [New Scientist news] Stephen ----------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2600 College St. Sherbrooke QC J1M 1Z7 Canada ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
