2
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 329:
Line 329: + + + +
Talk:Flaws in Richard Lenski Study (view source)
Revision as of 04:04, July 25, 2008
, 04:04, July 25, 2008→The letter is way too long...: new section
:I fail to see the relevance of the Sokal Hoax here. You should also know that Social Text was not a peer-reviewed journal when Sokal submitted his paper. That doesn't excuse the credulity of its editors, but Sokal's paper was not sent out for review. Not to say that it would have mattered, postmodernism is just meaningless word salad.[[User:Gerlach|Gerlach]] 13:39, 16 July 2008 (EDT)
:I fail to see the relevance of the Sokal Hoax here. You should also know that Social Text was not a peer-reviewed journal when Sokal submitted his paper. That doesn't excuse the credulity of its editors, but Sokal's paper was not sent out for review. Not to say that it would have mattered, postmodernism is just meaningless word salad.[[User:Gerlach|Gerlach]] 13:39, 16 July 2008 (EDT)
== The letter is way too long... ==
from what I understand, PNAS has a 250 word limit on letters. The above proposed letter is too long. [[User:Leonard|Leonard]] 00:04, 25 July 2008 (EDT)