Posted by: killer7
Posting time: 2.6 years ago on 4/18/2018 3:00:26 AM
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 7/17/2018 10:00:00 AM
Views: 107
SCP: 16
16 upvotes, 0 downvotes (100% upvoted it)
~2 user(s) here now
Please try to post direct links to journals. Biased articles and sensational titles will be deleted.
Other Science Subs:
/v/labrat
/v/chemistry
/v/biochemistry
/v/microbiology
/v/neuroscience
/v/computationalbiology
/v/psychology
/v/archaeology
/v/herpetology
/v/OldScience
The rules can be found here. Please read the full post for specifics.
An abridged version is available below:
NSFW: No Authorized: No Anon: No Private: No Type: Default
Content violates spam guidelines
Content contains or links to content that is illegal
Content contains personal information that relates to a Voat users real world or online identity
Content or User violates User Agreement
Hi, it looks like you're new. Welcome to Voat!
Voat is a censorship-free community platform where content is submitted, organized, moderated and voted on (ranked) by the users.
Archived A few scientists are open to bribery+influence, but journals and the peer review process have long been held up to be robust examples of the scientific method. A new report throws up some doubts. (digitaljournal.com)
submitted 2.6 years ago by killer7
view the rest of the comments →
[–] BlackGrapeDrank 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) 2.6 years ago
except with global warming hoax papers...
view the rest of the comments →
[–] BlackGrapeDrank 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
except with global warming hoax papers...