Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Greg

Valentina zharkova

Recommended Posts

A peer reviewed article taken down for NO reason.  Has anyone heard of that happening,,,,or why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it was peer reviewed by 50 people and the editor takes it down over some mumbo gumbo lololol. Wonder what the peers that read it thought about that. Or how even nature is politicized.   Just gives more ammo to the fact that money can buy influence......especially when this paper was basically mathematical in nature.  Time will tell if Copernicus was right ,,,, did he take into account the wobble,,,maybe Copernicus is wrong lololol

While we get record cold,,, got to keep the the global warming garbage narrative on life support.  Yeah well we need only time and looks like she has the best model out there

  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Vancanneyt Sander said:

The reason for the retraction can be found here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-61020-3

I'm sorry but I need to say something.

 

It seems to me that as a science board, we have the responsibility to fight off pseudoscience.

 

Now things that remain to be proven certainly belong here, but attacks on the scientific consensus or disproven pseudoscience should be weeded out, specially in times like this, when pseudoscience and conspiracy theories are all the rage among our less-educated fellows.

Edited by Maxime Fiset
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why defend Valentina Zharkova.
If her predictions were correct, she certainly would not have the merit of all this, there were at least fifty who predicted an imminent decline in solar activity.
I also note that according to Valentina Zharkova, the Spoerer Minimum does not exist ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2020 at 3:40 AM, Greg said:

Just gives more ammo to the fact that money can buy influence......especially when this paper was basically mathematical in nature. 

Anyone can attach math to their argument for the sake of sounding correct to others, but when the math itself is disproven, it would be quite difficult to justify accepting the conclusions derived from said math. "lololol" -> Doesn't exactly inspire confidence that you are mature enough to recognize this logic, nor does your conspiracy theory that the retraction of the article was "bought" for the sake of "influence". Your antagonistic and pseudo-scientific sentiments are best kept to yourself, if you value your dignity, lest you aim to give further support to the conclusions stated in the aforementioned article, ideally with math that is not arbitrary in nature(which was the case for that article.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did any so called scientist bother to read the paper, ,let alone understand the mathematics...  maybe discuss the research that was done

Oh by the way the idiotic excuse for the retraction had nothing to do with the data and interpretation of the data... again maybe read the paper before you parrot what ever you FEEL JIVES WITH YOUR DOGMA.

 

  • Like 1
  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you also agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.