...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
Dr. Clyde Winters : The Decipherment of the Olmec Writing System
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl: Deceitful One speaks again. I am not claiming that my 10-12 Comments to PLoS papers are letters to the editors. My letters to the editors were published by BioEssay and the Proceedings of the Royal Society. These papers were responded to by the authors. Stop trying to compare my comments to PLoS articles and the Dienekes.blogspot, as letters to the editor. Oh Great Deceiver you are the one trying to be tricky . [/qb][/QUOTE]Continuing to lie and obfuscate. We have finally settled that the stuff you submit to PloS is not peer reviewed. However, you hope that playing with words will confuse your followers. In some journals, for example, [b]Nature[/b] "letters" means something that is original research and is peer reviewed. However, not every journal uses the term equally, nor does a reply to a comment mean that somehow it becomes peer reviewed. Your submission to BioEssays for example. Original paper: Chaubey G, Metspalu M, Kivisild T, Villems, R. 2007. “Peopling of South Asia: investigating the caste-tribe continuum in India,” [b]BioEssays[/b] 29:91–100 Winters comment: Winters C. 2007 “Did the Dravidian speakers originate in Africa?” [b]BioEssays[/b] 29:497–498. The authors replied to Winters in order to point out his embarassingly huge error. BTW Kivisild is the author of the 1999 paper that Winters continues to misquote. Does Winters think that he knows better than the author himself? Gyaneshwer Chaubey, Mait Metspalu, Richard Villems, Toomas Kivisild. 2007. “Reply to Winters” [b]BioEssays[/b] 29(5): 499 The key passage in Chaubey, et als’ reply says: “MtDNA-based genetic arguments provided by Dr. Winters in favor of gene flow from Africa to Dravidian-speaking Indians are, however, [b]entirely erroneous. The author has been, unfortunately, confused by overlooking changes in mtDNA haplogroup (hg) nomenclature. Namely hg, M1 in Kivisild et al.(4) has been later changed to hg M3, in order to avoid parallel nomenclatures.(5)[/b] Furthermore, a recent dedicated paper on phylogeography of mtDNA hg M1(6) as well as an extensive comparative mapping of autosomal genetic markers among many Indian populations relative to global populations elsewhere, including Africans,(7) do not provide any clues for a putative recent gene flow, from Africa, to Dravidian-speaking populations in South Asia. And contrary to Winters’ assertion (who is the liar?), BioEssays does not peer review his type of submission. Subject: Re: Question Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 11:39:50 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-ELNK-Received-Info: spv=0; X-ELNK-AV: 0 X-ELNK-Info: sbv=4; sbrc=+0; sbf=bb; sbw=000; sbr=+ In answer to your question - No - correspondence does not undergo peer review, it is read and accepted or rejected by the Editor only. If you would like to send me your piece I will pass it to the Editor. Best wishes Stephanie Hamer Editorial Administrator BioEssays ----- Original Message ----- Dear Sirs: A question: Are letters submitted to the "Correspondence" section of BioEssays refereed in the same way that other submitted articles are? Thank you, [/qb][/QUOTE]LOL. You are just so jealous of me and my success. Oh Deceitful One, if the Editor of BioEssay will publish anything, any one writes why don't you send them an article and see if it is published. You are a liar, and sad because the only bright point in your career when anyone cared about what you wrote was your attack on Ivan. Ivan popularized what other people wrote about in the books he edited. As a result, he could not back up what he talked about. I am not Ivan, I don't have patience for ignorant, racist people like you. I research what I write about carefully. We have debated many times on this forum and each time you lose. You lose because you are not a researcher of truth. You come here solely to be embarrassed by me. You just can't understand how a brother from the Ghetto, got a PhD, and can hold his own and surpass white researchers. Being, weak, and a Latino you just can't understand how I have the nerve to debate, Europeans and challenge their scholarship--when all your life you kept your head bowed low and stayed in the inferior place you situated yourself. This changed when you wrote the Ivan piece. For once in your life you were respected. You have hoped that you could regain this respect by attacking my work but, members of the academe won't support you. As a result, it is laymen like yourself who attack my work--not the experts. You are probably wondering why. I will tell you why. Linda Schele and some of the other Mayan experts attended my presentation. They knew what ammunition I had to support my research, firsthand--they don't want to get in a debate with me and lose. I will never forget how their students were looking at them waiting for them to question my research and they just sat their silent. They are not foolish like you.They don't want to have anything they say published, so I can prove them wrong. You love to challenge me and be found inferior. Oh Great Deceitful One, a liar never prospers. . . . . [/qb][/QUOTE]Please note that Clyde never addressed any of the evidence that the has been misrepresenting his "contributions" as refereed papers. In his usual fashion, when he is devoid of valid arguments he resorts to spewing ad hominem. Insults are the symbols of poverty of reason and desperation. The bottom line is that Winters BioEssay publication just like his PLoS Genetics ones are NOT refereed publications-- as attested by the editors of the respective journals. Screaming and yelling about "albinos denigrating the research of Afrocentrics" is not the point here. I am merely dealing with the question of honesty in the representation of what is being put forth. It has to do with method in science and with truth. We still have to deal with whether "personal reflections" and "commentary" are peer reviewed., and later on with the question of Winters accuracy in quoting his sources-- again truth and honesty in academic discourse not content necessarily. The next response will be an outpouring of irrelevant spam-- watch this space. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3