[pefloresjr]

Beyond the weaknesses of this study, some of the negative reaction to this is certainly due to the way it has been misused and promoted by the authors.  However, it looks to me like many are reacting more harshly because this is a STANFORD study.  Most here have high expectations for science out of Stanford and most of us have some measure of personal pride tied to Stanford excellence.  That factor doesn't really change the discussion regarding the actions the authors should take.  It does, however, inform some of the emotions expressed about it on this board.  

As for the study, I am not involved in peer review, but see some of it from my wife's work.  The language used by some scientists regarding this study struck me as particularly strong.  The next releases may quell some of that criticism, or not.  I am in the wait and see crowd but I don't think those who think the author's should "do the right thing" by admitting the weaknesses and even withdrawing it until they do better work is not akin to book burning or censorship.  It is asking that Stanford studies meet a high standard.  It is not unusual for papers from legitimate institutions to be withdrawn so that they can be further analyzed or so that work can be refined to meet pre-publication questions.  That is not censorship, it is part of the peer review process.  Again, the choice is with the authors and their department heads.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

Beyond the weaknesses of this study, some of the negative reaction to this is certainly due to the way it has been misused and promoted by the authors.  However, it looks to me like many are reacting more harshly because this is a STANFORD study.  Most here have high expectations for science out of Stanford and most of us have some measure of personal pride tied to Stanford excellence.  That factor doesn't really change the discussion regarding the actions the authors should take.  It does, however, inform some of the emotions expressed about it on this board.  

As for the study, I am not involved in peer review, but see some of it from my wife's work.  The language used by some scientists regarding this study struck me as particularly strong.  The next releases may quell some of that criticism, or not.  I am in the wait and see crowd but I don't think those who think the author's should "do the right thing" by admitting the weaknesses and even withdrawing it until they do better work is not akin to book burning or censorship.  It is asking that Stanford studies meet a high standard.  It is not unusual for papers from legitimate institutions to be withdrawn so that they can be further analyzed or so that work can be refined to meet pre-publication questions.  That is not censorship, it is part of the peer review process.  Again, the choice is with the authors and their department heads.  

Cheers,
Pete F.