There are two social institutions, the academic and judicial systems, that must distinguish science from pseudoscience for vital purposes requiring determination of the truth. The academic system has relied upon peer review to determine scientific truth for many purposes, including grant fund allocations, accepting professional journal publication submissions, and deciding who receives advance degrees.
Beginning with Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) the judicial system formally recognized peer review in the form of "general acceptance" by members of a discipline as the criteria for determining scientific truth for legal purposes. Over the intervening decades since 1923, courts gradually recognized that peer review based "general acceptance" had flaws. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (U.S. Sup. Crt. 1993) the United States Supreme Court formally recognized and adopted a more objective set of criteria for determining scientific truth than peer review based "general acceptance." The Court stated that peer review could be considered, but should not be the sole determinant.
The academic system has several dirty little secrets. All facts, ideas and research of equal validity are not treated equally when it comes to publication and funding. Facts and research that contradict "science" upon which economic interests and careers rely are falsely discredited or simply ignored. A primary flaw with peer review is that it is subject to corruption. The manner in which the academic system functions is one of the last holdovers from the guild system of the Middle Ages.
Under the peer review process, submissions are sent to selected members of a review panel known only to the editor. Often the editor can engineer rejection of a submission by selecting panel members known to be hostile to the theory or author. (Despite an alleged blind submission review process, it is not that difficult for the identity of the author to be determined or disclosed.) In addition, ideas or research generally inconsistent with accepted dogma or orthodoxy are rejected out of hand. Some scientists, like Darwinist biologists and anthropologists, are as afflicted with faith-based reality models as the most hard-headed creationist Christian fundamentalists with whom they are currently in conflict. Another mechanism used to bury inconvenient information is to hold submissions without making a decision. Once submitted to a journal, an article can not be submitted elsewhere unless rejected or withdrawn.
An even more dangerous threat to the free flow of information through professional journals is the unknown number of editors and reviewers that have been recruited by United States intelligence agencies to block and divert information the respective agencies do not want to see in the public domain.
For these reasons, THE SOCIOLOGY CENTERTN is launching a new subscription electronic science journal specifically dedicated to publishing valid science from all disciplines suppressed because it runs counter to economic, political, or cognitive police interests. The publication criteria are derived from judicial science evidentiary admission standards. These criteria are designed to be more objective and transparent than the anonymous peer review process. Submissions must meet standards that should allow any reader to judge its scientific merits and should expedite respective submissions published being recognized as evidence by the judicial system.
Access to THE JOURNAL OF SUPPRESSED SCIENCE will be by subscription. Due to the e-mail policy of iPower, the web host, when the first issue is available, subscribers will have to log onto a password protected page to read articles. Since the production date of the first issue will depend upon the speed with which submissions are received in response to the call for papers, those interested in subscribing to THE JOURNAL OF SUPPRESSED SCIENCE should register their desire to be notified of availability by sending an email to firstname.lastname@example.org
THE SOCIOLOGY CENTERTN announces a call for papers from all scientific disciplines. Competent individuals without professional credentials or advanced degrees may submit articles for consideration provided the submission meets all criteria and standards. All submissions must meet the following criteria and standards:
1. Articles must be submitted on a non returnable floppy disk or CD mailed to:
Journal of Suppressed Science
P.O. Box 101
Worthington, KY 41183
2. Submissions must include a return address, telephone number, and a current e-mail address.
3. The author(s) must demonstrate a reasonable expectation that the Submission would be rejected by journals of his discipline because:
(a) the subject, data or conclusions violate cognitive police parameters or the dominant dogma of the profession (i.e., archeological evidence of substantial tool making in North America 200,000 years ago.)
(b) work can not be published because the authors were on the losing side of a power struggle within their profession or that they have been blacklisted for other reason, such as violating political correctness.
(c) the subject, data or conclusions are contrary to economic or political interests with sufficient power to adversely influence academic decision-making.
(d) currently no journal exists for the subject of the article.
4. Submissions must be written in Word or WordPerfect format in a style consistent with the accepted journal standards of the respective discipline. Those with HTML programming skills may submit articles in HTML format that will produce the document format they prefer. Submissions in HTML format must also be accompanied with a Word or WordPerfect formatted version. Graphs, charts, and illustrations must also be submitted as separate .gif formatted files.
5. Submissions must be free of logical fallacies and falsified data. A signed sworn statement that the author and each co-author has not intentionally, knowingly, or wilfully used falsified data or rigged experimental results must accompany the submission.
6. Submissions must include an abstract. The abstract must include a formal statement of each hypothesis addressed (i.e., H1: There are three black holes in each one hundred cubic light years of space. H2: There are twenty-seven red giant stars in each one hundred cubic light years of space.) and when experiments are involved the null hypothesis tested must be clearly stated (i.e., H0: There is no statistically significant difference between the mortality rates of left handed individuals and right handed individuals.)
7. In 1993 the United States Supreme Court replaced the Fry Standard of general acceptance for admitting scientific evidence with new standards stated in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S. Ct. 2786, L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). The Court specifically recognized some flaws in the peer review process that impeded the recognition of new valid science. Those new standards for identifying science stated by the Supreme Court will serve as the publishing criteria for The Journal of Suppressed Science. This objective criteria will replace the peer review process used by other professional journals. Contents of each submission must specifically meet the Popperian standards of testability, falsifiability, and refutability adopted by the United States Supreme Court. The "Conclusions" section of the submission must contain a subsection that clearly states how the conclusions may be tested, specify what results would falsify the conclusions, and address what founded logical conclusions would be necessary to refute the authors conclusions. This should be a key tool that will assist readers in judging the scientific merits of the submission and expedite the purported experimental reality testing goal of professional science.
8. Authors will retain copyright on submissions and must include with the submission a signed release authorizing publication in electronic, print, and CD format.
9. In instances where publication of the research might result in retribution against the author, requests to withhold the author's name will be considered. If whistle blowers and former criminals in the witness protection program can be protected from harm, there is no reason the same consideration cannot be extended to scientific whistle blowers.
THE SOCIOLOGY CENTERTN also calls for submission of documentary evidence of science fraud and grant fraud. Of particular interest are instances in which federally funded research projects produced falsified final reports or failed to produce a final report because the experimental results contradicted official dogma or undermined economic interests. Send documentary evidence to:
Science Whistle Blower
Journal of Suppressed Science
P.O. Box 101
Worthington, KY 41183
©Copyright 2003 by James Roger Brown. All rights, including copyright, trade name and service mark, in the content of these THE SOCIOLOGY CENTER web pages are owned or controlled for these purposes by James Roger Brown.
In accessing THE SOCIOLOGY CENTER web pages, you agree that you may only download the open or public content pages for your own personal non-commercial use.
In accessing THE SOCIOLOGY CENTER web pages you agree not to copy, broadcast, download, store in any medium, transmit, show or play in public, adapt or change in any way the content of for purchase books and manuals or subscription publications or services, web pages, journals, news letters, or bulletins for any other purpose whatsoever without the prior written permission of James Roger Brown or upon payment of the purchase price or service subscription fees for limited temporary specified access and use rights.