Wednesday, September 01, 2010

The Open Access industry - basement based academic 'journals' in action

and here, an invitation I (a bioethicist/philosopher) received to review a manuscript. Do note the title of the journal (not my field) and the title of the article they need reviewed (has nothing to do with either my field or the journal).

moronia in academia...

International Journal of Peace and Development Studies


Dear Colleague,

We received a manuscript titled "



" I wish to inquire if you can create time to review this manuscript.  We will be most grateful if the manuscript can be reviewed and sent to us within 2 weeks.
Please find the abstract below:
 Abstract: The problem of truth in science - the most urgent problem of our time -   is discussed. The correct theoretical analysis of the generally accepted foundations of theoretical physics  is proposed. The principle of the unity of formal logic and rational dialectics is a methodological basis of the analysis. The main result is as follows: the foundations (i.e. classical thermodynamics, the special theory of relativity, quantum mechanics) contain logical errors The existence of logical errors is irrefutable proof of incorrectness of the theoretical foundations and means that theoretical physics enters the greatest crisis. The crisis in physics leads inevitably to the general crisis in science. The crisis as effect is explained by existence of the global cause: the crisis is a collateral and inevitable result of inductive method of knowledge of the Nature.

I am looking forward to your response and will be grateful to hear from you.

Kindly acknowledge the receipt of this mail

Best Regards,

Emekagbor Richard,

Editorial Assistant,
International Journal of Peace and Development Studies (IJPDS).


  1. Not my field either. But the paper has so many indices of being written by a crank that I would not hesitate in rejecting it (except for the fact that a journal with this title sent it out for refereeing at all, and sent it to you, might indicate that it is a perfect fit for the journal).

  2. Hmm, the article might be interesting I suppose: there's been even weirder stuff in scientific epistemology. But, apart from the fact that it has a Sokalish ring, what does it have to do with either the journal or you?


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Certainty is not a defensible standard for policy making in the context of assisted dying

I mentioned in a Bioethics editorial a while ago that new frontiers are opening in the assisted dying debate. As an increasing number of...