Further to “Debate!: Tree of life? Forest of life? What about matchwood? (Splinters? Slivers?):
Recently, there was an uproar around a retracted anti-Darwinist paper. With so many retractions out there, this got by us,
The Journal of Biology and Life Science, published by the Macrothink Institute, has retracted a paper that claimed “fossil does not provides [sic] the convincing and direct evidences for evolution,” for reasons that they left to us to figure out.
…
It struck us as a bit odd that someone like Charles Michener — an award-winning entomologist who wrote the introduction to a 1993 edition of Darwin’s The Origin of Species — would co-author a paper like this, so we asked him what had happened. Turns out it struck him as a bit odd, too. He explained:
The paper was submitted with my name as coauthor, even though I had no knowledge of the paper and had never contributed in any way to its writing or ideas. I was completely surprised to find my name as coauthor of a paper about which I knew nothing. My desire is to remove my name as coauthor of a paper to which I had made no contribution. I also requested that my name not be cited as a contributor within the paper. It is probably editor of the journal who wrote of rejection of the paper, not merely the removal of my name as coauthor.
We’ve contacted author Ahad and the journal for more details, and will update with anything we learn.
Good show, bookmarkable Retraction Watch.
That said, we here are surprised that anyone would wish their name to appear on a pro-Darwinist paper. Today, that’s like having your name appear on a pro-phlogiston paper. The live wires just aren’t doing that any more.
Hat tip: Pos-Darwinista
See also: If peer review is working, why all the retractions?
Follow UD News at Twitter!