That prompted this e-mail from me, not a public letter to the editor e-mail (as I am the editor of a suburban Dallas newspaper myself), but an e-mail sent to each member of the Snooze’s editorial board.
Does anybody on the DMN editorial board actually read scientific studies of things like this or not?
The claim by Ray Rogers that the C-14 tested thread was from patchwork has been convincingly refuted by Joe Nickell, who says the same material exists elsewhere on the Shroud.
AND, and, microanalyst Walter McCrone reported that nine years ago.
Problem is, McCrone was, as he says, “drummed out” of the main pro-Shroud group after his independent analysis failed to back up its claims.
As for peer review, note this quote from Nickell:Astonishingly — and with serious implications to the spirit of peer review — Rogers omits any mention of McCrone’s findings from his report while insisting elsewhere, ‘let’s be honest about our science.’ (Rogers 2004).
If the News had run this past its senior science writer (since in your gunshot-to-the foot cost cutting, you don't have a science editor anymore) you might have had somebody head you off at the pass.
Or maybe you wouldn't have cared anyway. In light of that possibility --
Next, I expect the following editorials:
“Secrets of Yeti still unsolved”
“Secrets of Atlantis still unsolved”
“Secrets of the Bermuda Triangle still unsolved”
If you’re going to write scientifically illiterate pablum like your Sunday Shroud editorial, here's some real ones to start investigating, then editorializing about:
“Mystery of Bush's claim to be a conservative still unsolved”
“Mystery of lack of progressive DMN opinion columnists still unsolved”
“Mystery of why the alt-weekly Observer laughs up its sleeve at the News ... ”
Sorry, scratch that one.
No comments:
Post a Comment