, 27 tweets, 10 min read Read on Twitter
Just to show what kind of papers are being published in so-called "scientific" journals, let's dive into some papers by a person working at the Research Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha (RIAAM) in Iran.
This appears to be a real institute. I am not sure if they would be supportive of some of the works being published under their name.
Note: I am focussing on the work by author AS, not on other research at this institute or country.
Yesterday, I talked about some preprints by this author in which he cut open a quail (a bird) and put in a mixture of beans and rice in the wound to create a new type of life.
(warning: some disturbing photos).
In another @viXra preprint, he connected two chicken embryos with wires.
Oh, and he also cut off the head of about 400 quails, and put them back up again.
(warning: more disturbing photos).
Some screenshots of the text in case you wondered what he did (I took out Figure 16).
His conclusion:
"We observe that if removing of head is done eventually, some extra signals are exchanged between brain and the little brain which leads to the stop of life. While, by removing heads suddenly, these signals couldnt be exchanged and life continues."
I am sure that Marie-Antoinette would disagree.
This author has written several other pearls on Vixra.org (the preprint server that will accept anything), such as: "Exploring extra dimensions by the help of DNAs of the egg cell and the earth"
In "Emergence of cancer by exchanging fields of microgravity between earth’s DNA and dark DNAs in extra dimensions" you can learn about the dark part of DNA and its hexagonal structure (one of which has only 5 corners, but that is ok).
The same author also published 2 papers in low quality journals published by World Scientific. This publisher is not on Beall's list but looks like a candidate.
The first paper is "A mathematical model for DNA" - published in International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics.
It has some statements that appear .... different from what I learned in biology class.
Peer review appears to have been remarkably fast - only 6 days. Two of those were in the weekend, though.
For the second paper, the RIAAM person teamed up with someone from @Uni_Marconi. Together they wrote: "A mathematical model for the Virus Medical Imaging technique" worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.114…
Peer review was performed @worldscientific in a whopping 2 days.
From the introduction: "In this paper, we will propose a new method which use of the electronic properties of DNAs in viruses and cells."
So I guess it is not about RNA viruses.
Then, it argues "radiated waves from DNAs of males and females have opposite signs and cancel the effect of each other in a pair".
Reference 16 is AS's own paper that I discussed above, "A mathematical model for DNA".
Thus, the paper continues, there are viruses that cancel out male DNA, and other viruses that cancel out female DNA. Or at least, that is what I think he says.
The paper continues with a bunch of formulas which I will admit, look impressive to me, but i cannot really say much about them.
But I am pretty sure the stuff about male and female viruses is not correct.
I would love someone to pitch in to check if the formulas make any sense. My brain just goes blank here hahaha.
But voila! The authors have created a "Virus Medical Imaging Machine" that can tell you the genders of both the virus as well as the patient.
Which seems ... not very useful.
Not sure if I understand this. I think the authors Machine can detect the gender of a fetus by infecting a pregnant woman with male or female Influenza virus and hooking her up to electrical wires.
What could possibly go wrong?
Warning: don't try this at home, folks.
I also enjoyed (cough cough) the phrase "both of fetuses are in second month after their production."
The authors conclude that "Thus, this mechanism is one of best methods for medical imaging".
Which I have to disagree with.
OK, so we can laugh here, or shrug, but this is dangerous stuff that is being published under the veil of #PeerReview. Suppose that a person thinks this is a scientific method and tries this on a pregnant woman?
The Research Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha (RIAAM) in Iran,
@Uni_Marconi in Rome, and @worldscientific need to take a real close look at these papers. They are not scientific, not peer reviewed, and a liability.
So, @WorldScientific, this is a complete failure of your #PeerReview system.
I am going to nominate you as a predatory publisher.
Here is a new one for your list, @stoppredatoryj . See thread above.
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Elisabeth Bik
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!