Comments on: EDP Sciences Releases A Statement On Publishing 9/11 Conspiracies @EDPSciences https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/edp-sciences-releases-a-statement-on-publishing-911-conspiracies-edpsciences/ Home of Stephen Knight and The #GSPodcast Fri, 03 Jan 2020 19:13:38 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.0.8 By: Stephen Knight https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/edp-sciences-releases-a-statement-on-publishing-911-conspiracies-edpsciences/#comment-7846 Tue, 11 Jul 2017 05:09:36 +0000 https://www.gspellchecker.com/?p=4532#comment-7846 Yes. Woeful response https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/11/europhysics-news-releases-woeful-response-to-their-911-conspiracy-blunder/

]]> By: Peter C https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/edp-sciences-releases-a-statement-on-publishing-911-conspiracies-edpsciences/#comment-7845 Mon, 10 Jul 2017 22:40:27 +0000 https://www.gspellchecker.com/?p=4532#comment-7845 Stephen, did EPN ever publish the counter-article in November as claimed? Do you have a link to it, or a blog post summarizing it?

]]> By: Stephen Knight https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/edp-sciences-releases-a-statement-on-publishing-911-conspiracies-edpsciences/#comment-7456 Tue, 31 Jan 2017 17:15:17 +0000 https://www.gspellchecker.com/?p=4532#comment-7456 They are not ‘facts’, scientific or otherwise. No amount of capital letters will change that. What we were provided however, was a collection of previously debunked claims made by a number of known 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

http://www.snopes.com/journal-endorses-911-conspiracy-theory/

The only thing ‘hurt’ here is this publications reputation. They are free to publish whatever they want, and I am free to judge them for it.

]]> By: rpsabq2014rpsabq https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/edp-sciences-releases-a-statement-on-publishing-911-conspiracies-edpsciences/#comment-7449 Sun, 29 Jan 2017 03:02:12 +0000 https://www.gspellchecker.com/?p=4532#comment-7449 The article was published because it was rooted in scientific FACTS, not emotion. What FACTS do you have to support the non-publishing of the article? Because all I hear you saying is that your feelings were hurt.

]]> By: The European Scientific Journal Did Not Conclude 9/11 Was A ‘Controlled Demolition’ | Godless Spellchecker's Blog https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/edp-sciences-releases-a-statement-on-publishing-911-conspiracies-edpsciences/#comment-7146 Fri, 07 Oct 2016 09:40:57 +0000 https://www.gspellchecker.com/?p=4532#comment-7146 […] News’ has released a statement in response to this article. You can read it here. In short, they have confirmed this magazine is not peer-reviewed and contains […]

]]> By: aljones909 https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/edp-sciences-releases-a-statement-on-publishing-911-conspiracies-edpsciences/#comment-7077 Thu, 29 Sep 2016 23:05:14 +0000 https://www.gspellchecker.com/?p=4532#comment-7077 Look out for the special issue covering “flat earth” theories. It’s important to publish views “which are sometimes controversial”. A sanity check on articles would be an unwelcome impediment to true scientific discourse.

]]> By: pilky https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/edp-sciences-releases-a-statement-on-publishing-911-conspiracies-edpsciences/#comment-7036 Thu, 22 Sep 2016 12:47:27 +0000 https://www.gspellchecker.com/?p=4532#comment-7036 Well done for challenging and exposing them.

]]>