4 ms·
You're misunderstanding. There are two papers here: LaCour's, which is the original paper, and Green's, which is based on LaCour's. Green has retracted his p
by aetherson 11y ago
You're misunderstanding. There are two papers here: LaCour's, which is the original paper, and Green's, which is based on LaCour's.
Green has retracted his paper by way of essentially accusing LaCour of falsifying data. His paper is retracted, fin.
Science has not yet decided whether it will on its own recognizance retract LaCour's paper.
- Pinatubo 11y agoLaCour and Green were actually coauthors on the retracted paper: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/346/6215/1366 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/346/6215/1366
- thaumasiotes 11y agoI really wish I could downvote a direct reply. There is one paper. Green, the primary author, retracted it when LaCour, the grad student, failed to do so. But just because the author says "this paper is full of lies" doesn't mean Science will admit it.