3 ms·
This is the most problematic part to me: "He went on to say that "unless these journals change dramatically," the federal government would "stop NIH scientists
by derbOac 1y ago
This is the most problematic part to me:
"He went on to say that "unless these journals change dramatically," the federal government would "stop NIH scientists from publishing there" and create "in-house" journals instead."
This isn't about Nature. It's about the idea of subjecting your research to outside peer review of any kind. They're objecting to the idea of submitting their research to any outside standards.
- ryandvm 1y agoThe problem here is that at least half the population just lacks the critical thinking skills to even understand why peer review is necessary. If you've ever talked to one of these people about contrails, or whether evolution is real or not, or ghosts, or any number of boneheaded nonsense, you will eventually realize just how hopeless it is to expect them to ever be able to use logic. You might as well be teaching your dog to talk.
- sophacles 1y agoI don't think it's accurate to imply that there are internal standards.