Notices
Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Are WSEAS conferences a Pseudoscience?

  1. #1 Are WSEAS conferences a Pseudoscience? 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3
    I often receive e-mails from them and Prof. Nikos E. Mastorakis. Internet says that they use spam and maybe are one of those pseudoscience money making scheme. Is that true? The registration fee is between 500 and 550 Euros and I havenít found a report of anyone who actually participated in one of these conferences. Did anybody heard about WSEAS conferences?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    421
    Of the mathematical conferences that I've attended, I've never had to pay a registration fee. Moreover, the conference, or some other institution, has always reimbursed me for my travel expenses.

    When a scientific conference has sufficient funds to accommodate its participants, it's a good sign that the topics and the speakers have the support and trust of the scientific community behind them.

    Now these days I wouldn't jump to conclusions if the conference expected non-speaking participants to pay for hotel and travel expenses. But for that conference to additionally charge 500 euros for admission? That sounds truly bizarre, and my guess is that it's a scam.

    Additionally, you always have to ask yourself--why are you being invited? If you can't think of a connection between you and the people emailing you--guess what--it's spam.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    I've never heard of the conference(s), but decided to Google it. I founds some interesting things.

    Here's a blog that was commenting on a different comment, but several readers commented about WSEAS: http://3dpancakes.typepad.com/ernie/...ic_spam_a.html

    Here's a sample comment:
    Quote Originally Posted by off-site_blog_comment
    was working for wseas and the only thing they have is two desktop computers. Even if you will send a pdf which will say FUCK WSEAS they will publish it . Check it on yourself. The whole thing is for financial benefit of a person who illegally has this company "prof." N. E. Mastorakis. No conference at all, WSEAS is good for vacations, drinking, dancing and spending your money for Mastorakis belly. Out of the fees only 90euros or something goes for the actual conference. Big scums...
    Here's a list of conferences of "Known conferences and journals of (very) dubious reputation."

    This is a SlashDot article that reveals a different conference that accepted a bogus paper. Perhaps someone could do the same to WSEAS and determine their legitimacy once and for all.

    This is the type of thread I've always liked seeing in a Pseudoscience subforum of a science forum. I think exposing pseudoscience and discussing the problem of pseudoscience has a lot more value than posts that end up here simple because they're fringe, crackpot, or nutty ideas with pseudoscientific perspectives and principles.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    421
    To SkinWalker and other admins:

    The pseudoscience section has been used for so long as a dumping bin for cranky posts, it actually hadn't occurred to me that we could use it as a forum for debunking scams and bad science claims. But I think that's a great idea. Is there any way we can reorganize the pseudoscience section to make that intention more clear? As a start, perhaps we can redirect crackpot debates to the new hypothesis section instead of redirecting them here.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3
    Thank you for answers.
    Then what about all those people: http://www.worldses.org/plenary/index.html ? Are they pseudoscientists or were they deceived?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    8
    Allow me not to agree with you. From your replies, and from your comments , it seems that none of you have never attended these excellent conferences.

    First of all this Society WS ΕAS has given all the Review Process to the Universities
    (Harvard, MIT, Cambridge, Imperial College, ETH, ....) that host its conferences.
    Secondly its books and Proceedings are in ISI
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    8
    Continue....

    Of course, people that write the slanderous comments anonymously on the web have their own "company" of conferences or are involved into many other conferences and journals. I visited the Headquarters of the Society and they had a team of 15-20 people hard working.


    The Society WSES has naver published low quality papers.
    These low quality papers can be found elsewhere.

    The Proceedings of WESΑS are of exceptional quality and they receive many citiations from ISI Journals leading them to direct inclusion to ISI, SCOPUS, ELSEVIER, ACM, ASM, ASME, IEEE and many other reputable indexes
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    421
    Quote Originally Posted by Micuko
    Continue....

    Of course, people that write these slanderous comments have their own "company" of conferences. I visited the Headquarters of the Society and they had a team of 15-20 people hard working.

    Of course, people that write these slanderous comments have their own "company" of conferences. WSEAS has naver published low quality papers.
    These low quality papers can be found elsewhere. The Proceedings of WSES are of exceptional quality and they receive many citiations from ISI Journals leading them to direct inclusion to ISI, SCOPUS, ELSEVIER, ACM, ASM, ASME, IEEE and many other reputable indexes
    If the conferences are so prestigious, why do they need to charge for admission? Prestigious science conferences usually get inundated with funding from various educational and government agencies.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    8
    Societies that organize conferences with Harvard, MIT, Cambridge, ETH, University of London, etc... can have only brilliant and prestigious conferences.

    Societies that have Books and Journals in all the data bases (including ISI ) can only be important for the development of science.

    About the fees: Contact them and find their contracts with the universities.

    Anyway, it is better to contact them and ask them to send you some CD-ROMs or some of their Books
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Clearly we have a shill from the conference among us. Consistent with a scam.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    8
    I do not have any relation with any conference, but even If I had, i could not see the reason why not to speak. Simply, I want to say the truth and I do not want to continue the discussion. So, I have here some objective things that nobody can doubt.


    I try simply to explain you that societies that organize conferences with Harvard, MIT, Cambridge, ETH, University of London, etc... can have only brilliant and prestigious conferences.

    Societies that have Books and Journals in all the data bases (including ISI ) can only be important for the development of science.

    If I have a book or CD or Journal that it is in ISI, SCOPUS, IEE, IEEE etc.. then nobody can tell me something.

    These are the "reviewers" of the Conferences and these indexes decide what is good and what is bad.

    And the WSAES fulfills all these criteria. Simply check the Indexes and you will find them inside...

    But let's examine isolated papers and authors rather than Publishing Houses.
    Publishing Houses and Societies make their "job" and we must make our "job"
    by reading the papers themselves carefully.

    It is medieval mentality to send to the "fire" one publishing house or another without reading anything from its books.

    I will not continue this discussion. I have no relation with them , but I want to be fair.

    So, If you want to send me more things about this topic, because I do not want to take more space from the Host of this blog, visit me
    [link removed] to discuss it


    Discussion can be here or not at all
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    I'm fine having a discussion here. Thanks anyway. In fact, it looks like you set up a blog just for discussion on WSEAS. Interesting.

    Anyway, what would define a scam or bogus conference anyway? Certainly if they published just any old thing without regard for intellectual discourse or academic ethics, but this would be stupid of even a conference that set out to line the pockets of a few insiders.

    I haven't a dog in the hunt of math and engineering conferences. I'm an anthropologist and a different sort of nerd altogether, so I think I'm objective enough to look at WSEAS, which I have. I'll never need to worry about having a paper accepted there or pissing off some math geek professor that favors them.

    So, after reviewing what others had to say, including WSEAS "supporters," I'd like to share what I've noted (and I've actually put out a few emails to some professors in the field to get a sense of what they think, but no responses yet).

    1) WSEAS has truly spammed the hell out of the interenet. They have blogspot blogs, wordpress blogs, livejournal blogs, Yahoo! groups, several domains, etc., etc. Ugh... they're shameless in that regard. However, this doesn't necessarily imply they're not academically sound.

    2) There are several places around the interenet where people have voiced some very negative opinions about WSEAS (along with several other "conferences"). At least one of these claimed to have worked for WSEAS at some point and stated it was a money making venture first and foremost. Academic goals are secondary.

    3) There was significant enough question as to the legitimate reputation of WSEAS -enough so that if I were considering publishing in the field of math and engineering, I would avoid them. Particularly if I planned on having my CV taken seriously in the future. One person even remarked that publishing with them gave the appearance of CV-padding. Even if it weren't true, the mere perception is enough for me to avoid them.

    4) An interesting pattern I noticed was that WSEAS run blogs and their alleged proponents frequently included pages that would show up in Google search terms that included "bogus," "fraud," "scam" and other like terms. Some were in defense of such accusations, but the majority seemed unrelated to accusations -and even seemed to avoid any mention that others might accuse them of such a thing. This is clearly a pattern of "Google bombing" in which they're using a tactic to hog the search terms and funnel anyone using them in correlation with "WSEAS" to their own sites, all the while keeping them from the relatively few sites critical of WSEAS. It was effective. I had to get creative in my Google searches and be willing to manually filter the WSEAS propaganda out to find the criticisms. Had they not Google-bombed these terms, the critics would have floated right to the top of the page. This, in my view is unethical and evidence of an underhanded agenda. But its one that is easily denied and I suspect their shill above will return to defend WSEAS in just such a denial.

    5) Wherever there were blogs or other sites that criticized WSEAS, there nearly always appeared a shill or two that talked WSEAS up and sewed the seeds of doubt, usually by appealing to authority, arguing from the band wagon / popularity, straw man arguments, etc.

    and finally,

    6) The sheer volume and style of websites WSEAS has on the internet is reminiscent of some sort of multi-level marketing scheme rather than an academic pursuit. Testimonial after testimonial, anecdotal accounts, appeals to authority, and even the aesthetic appearance of the sites -it was like visiting an Amway webpage. I kept looking for the pink Cadillac photos showing recent high-rolling "sellers."

    My opinion:

    If you're looking for a math or engineering conference to publish in, be wary. I think I'd avoid WSEAS along with several others. Find a conference you're interested in, then email others who have participated (get a copy of the proceedings and look for students or professors in your field in the authors). Ask what they thought of the experience -if they met others in their field, had good discussions, participated in some interesting talks, and came away feeling like they gained something, then its probably worth your while. Perhaps this is the case with WSEAS -but I'm not sure I'd take the chance given their dubious marketing strategies and shameless promotion on the web.

    Now, I'm sure we'll have the shill speak again. Or perhaps a new one altogether.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13 http://micukoaraki.blogspot.com 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    8
    See my reply here
    LINK DELETED
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Wikipedia deletes submitted WSEAS pages for "blatant advertising". There was talk of keeping it as a warning, "If we were a consumer guide, not an encyclopedia."
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,270
    reply to what, and why should we follow a random link?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    I deleted two posts by the WSEAS shill and edited a third to remove the blog link. I'm fine with including a blog link if he were actually participating in discussion, but his goal seems to be to move discussion to more 'friendly' ground, i.e. a site where the alleged 'professor' has control over content.

    The discussion started here. This is as good a venue for discourse as any.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinWalker
    his goal seems to be to move discussion to more 'friendly' ground, i.e. a site where the alleged 'professor' has control over content.
    Or to simply improve his site Google rankings, if no user clicks the link. The search engine crawlers do click links, and assign relevance by the body text herein.

    I'm wondering: How was he alerted to this thread? Optimization tool?
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    I think they have a few people, probably their head honcho, who just sit at their computers in Spain and Greece googling for mentions. Where they find it, they act like proponents of various pseudoscience or "alternative medicine" therapies in going bonkers on their critics.

    Very telling, if you ask me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinWalker
    I think they have a few people, probably their head honcho, who just sit at their computers in Spain and Greece googling for mentions. Where they find it, they act like proponents of various pseudoscience or "alternative medicine" therapies in going bonkers on their critics.
    Probably you're right.
    Brrrrr....

    Its interesting, how do they organize conferences with Harvard, MIT, Cambridge, ETH, University of London, etc? Maybe they just rent conference rooms and some infrastructure there?

    Do their Proceedings really receive many citiations from ISI Journals leading them to direct inclusion to ISI, SCOPUS, ELSEVIER, ACM, ASM, ASME, IEEE and many other reputable indexes?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Update: I have just received word from my University that Mudd Law Offices in Chicago has sent a "take-down" letter for me to their address.

    My university has no connection to The Science Forum and I am not the owner of The Science Forum, so, perhaps the owner received a similar letter. The letter, which I'll probably post on the web once I get a copy next week (I haven't actually seen it yet), demands that this thread be removed as defamatory to WSEAS. The letter also says not to discuss the letter or post it on the net. I could care less about that as there is no law preventing me from doing so.

    But, regarding the "defamatory" claim by WSEAS, I don't think they have a leg to stand on. The vast majority of what I posted in this thread were observations from the web. I posted my personal opinion based on those observations. If (In)Sanity feels threatened and wants to remove the thread, I'll understand. And then promptly repost the contents on my own blog.

    I think public organizations who take funds from students should be open to scrutiny and criticism. If they aren't, then that says a lot about the organization itself.

    Perhaps my critique was off the mark. Perhaps WSEAS is a reputable organization devoted to academics. But, if they are, should their reputation speak for itself? If you google "WSEAS SPAM" you get some interesting results. Some of the hits are critical of WSEAS (this thread is one of them); some of the hits are sites set up by WSEAS to discuss .... spam. I kid you not. A "world" engineering conference has a multitude of blogs set up that don't discuss WSEAS in many (or any?) of their posts. They discuss spam.

    If you haven't heard of it, this, my friends is called a "google bomb." You put the topic you want to affect search results for in a post and press publish. You go on to another site and do the same. Wash, rinse, repeat. Eventually, when someone types the targeted search term in google, they get you instead of the normal results.

    Interesting.

    Not that I'm advocating it, but such a thing works both ways, WSEAS. I wonder what would happen if a blogosphere full of skeptical and science bloggers picked up on this?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    wow...... No shit?
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    No shit.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    New Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1
    I realize this is a fairly old topic, but I wanted to bump the thread because WSEAS has been puzzling me for years. They do not appear to be slowing down, and at times they almost seem to accumulate particles of legitimacy. I can tell you, based on my own narrow experiences, that WSEAS publications are viewed skeptically when they appear on someone's CV. It is nevertheless possible that the organization deserves more respect than it receives. I am partly concerned that there may be some invisible cultural, national or economic divide between WSEAS enthusiasts and its detractors.

    Here are some observations for and against recognizing WSEAS as a reputable venue:

    Pro:
    • * According to their publications, a number of IEEE Fellows are involved in their events and publications.
      * According to WSEAS, Prof. Demetrios Kazakos is an enthusiastic participant in WSEAS events, and has been appointed to be a Program Director at the NSF.
      * Their website has photo albums which indicate that the conferences actually occur (there is some speculation on the web that these events do not physically happen).


    Con:
    • * Their online presence appears unprofessional. Examples:
      [list:f2a39239c5]
      - Frequent unsolicited emails about their conferences (yes, it is spam).
      - Messages include insistent claims of their own legitimacy.
      - The "Urgent News" on their web site includes things like this:

      We wish your academic journey through the oceans of
      SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH to always have good winds and the blessing of God...
      Is that really "urgent news"? And why the all-caps?

    * It is difficult to discern the philosophy or objectives behind the WSEAS "multi-conferences". They seem to span all possible areas of inquiry without much disciplinary organization or guiding principles.
    * It seems as though everyone is "invited" to give an invited talk or special session or tutorial. Is that really what "invited" means?[/list:u:f2a39239c5]

    In any event, this thread may have died out but I am still interested in understanding the WSEAS phenomenon. I hope others on this board might be interested in continuing the discussion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •