Freethought & Rationalism Archive

BSM · 01-27-2005, 05:38 PM

In response to Layman, Carrier writes:

Quote:

The Journal of Higher Criticism and the Skeptical Inquirer, just like Biology & Philosophy, Reports of the National Center for Science Education, German Studies Review and the Encyclopedia of the Ancient World, all of which have published my scholarship, are peer reviewed journals (plus one printed reference)--which means members of the scholarly community decide whether my scholarship is credible. They decided it was. QED.

Now, what evidence does Jean have that any member of that community thinks otherwise?

Layman originally wrote:

Quote:

not all of us take the Journal of Higher Criticism, Freehthought Today, the Skeptical Inquirer to be "serious scholarly circles"

This may be true, however, thankfully you are not doing the selecting. In fact, the professionals whose job it is to select quality publications for their libraries do consider Carrier's titles to be scholarly, and worthy of inclusion.

Using Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, Magazines for Libraries, WorldCat, and ChoiceReviews.online, I decided to see what the professionals had to say about those publications:

Biology & Philosophy

Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory (2003): Scholarly refereed journal (i.e., peer reviewed by scholars in the field), p. 664.

WorldCat: 191 libraries worldwide, numerous academic libraries including Harvard and Yale.

Journal of Higher Criticism

Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory (2003): Scholarly refereed journal, p. 7417.

WorldCat: 37 libraries worldwide, numerous academic libraries including Princeton.

Skeptical Inquirer

Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory (2003): Academic/scholarly magazine, articles are reviewed and edited (My comment: not always to the degree of an academic journal, but many articles could make a peer reviewed journal), p. 6536.

Magazines for Libraries (2004): Recommended title. Quote from p. 804: “The journal encourages scientific research…�?

WorldCat: 1039 libraries worldwide, mixture of academic and public libraries.

German Studies Review

Magazines for Libraries (2004): Recommended title. Peer reviewed publication, recommended for academic libraries, p. 434.

WorldCat: 369 libraries worldwide, numerous academic libraries including Harvard, Yale, and Princeton.

Reports of the National Center for Science Education

Quote from here: http://www.natcenscied.org/author_instructions.asp

"All article manuscripts are submitted to reviewers for comments on their technical content and suitability for a general audience."

I could not discern if the staff is also the article reviewers. However, they do have credentials and I would dare call them experts in their field: http://www.natcenscied.org/ourstaff.asp

WorldCat: 71 libraries worldwide, numerous academic libraries including Stanford.

Encyclopedia of the Ancient World

ChoiceReviews.Online: Recommended “only for lower college levels.�?

WorldCat: 507 libraries worldwide, many academic libraries.

In short, ALL of these publications are scholary.

~BSM

Gunnaheave · 01-27-2005, 05:45 PM

Mod Note: Given the personal turn in this thread, I am closing it.

Dean Anderson · 01-30-2005, 01:32 PM

The following legal correction has been supplied by Richard Carrier

Quote:

From Richard Carrier:

I misstated the case earlier about the legal situation. I apologize for the error. The correct statement is as follows:

"Claims for libel and slander brought by a public figure must prove:
3. The defendant, at the time of the publication,
a. knew that the statement was false and defamed plaintiff, or
b. published the statement in reckless disregard of whether the matter was false and defamed the plaintiff."

(which means "that the defendant actually had serious doubts about the truthfulness of the statement at the time of its publication.")

"The Civil Committee on California Jury Instructions," No. 7.04, section 3.

At the present time, Jean's statement does not meet this standard. My intention was to warn that if Jean persists in spreading this lie, eventually Jean could meet this standard, and therefore should desist from stating what he now knows to be false. I did not intend to give any other impression, and if I did, I apologize for that as well.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-27-2005, 05:45 PM	#12
Gunnaheave Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: AZ Posts: 3,250	Mod Note: Given the personal turn in this thread, I am closing it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.