Thread: Problems/Inconsistencies on this paper?

I wanted to get this paper reviewed by people with actual experience and education in Chemistry.

If this is not chemistry, please let me know so I can go to the proper forums.

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/co...001/7TOCPJ.SGM

I understand that it's got some non-scientific rhetoric, I would ask that this is ignored and only the methods and results are scrutinized.

I appreciate any help or input.

You do have to download it.

Thank you again.

I have not downloaded it, but you can take a look at these links for an extra perspective:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=139293

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=110489

Thank you for that.

If you do happen to get a chance to look at it some time I would appreciate it greatly.

I have absolutely ZERO understanding of science and so the only thing I can get out of this paper are the strange things that don't seem to belong in a science paper.

Mainly, the fact that the "samples" were collected and stored and donated by 5 random people.

Mainly, the fact that the "samples" were collected and stored and donated by 5 random people.

Yeah, if that is true then it certainly brings a lot of doubt down onto it.

Those links I provided show that the journal that the paper was published in does not adhere to proper peer review standards and anyone that can pay the fee can publish something. There are no equivalent papers published in any reputable journals. The only reasons for this could be that they simply didn't see the need, knew they would be rejected and purposefully chose a journal that would accept their paper no questions asked, or they did submit the paper to respected journals and were rejected. The writer of the paper also does not have a very good name in the appropriate circles as far as I can gather. In any case there are more than enough reasons to pretty much disregard this paper completely.

PS: Your forum name is "unintelligent", but you have shown that you are nobody's fool by employing some healthy scepticism. :wink: Don’t sell yourself short.

Thank you for your responses. I am definitely making sure I go through these threads you posted carefully. I am interested in scientific responses from people with credentials in science.

I just like to ask questions and get solid answers.