> Presenting things that were previously unheard of... well, that would be what scientific papers are for, aren't they? Not really. Just replicating existing f

> Presenting things that were previously unheard of... well, that would be what scientific papers are for, aren't they? Not really. Just replicating existing findings, summarizing knowledge that would otherwise be spread out across multiple papers, articulating an opinion, or just applying something another paper did in a similar fashion ("I did the same but with blues music!") is a perfectly valid endeavor. You should however state what your paper contains somewhere at the beginning, which is what they did there - albeit in a "flashy" manner.