IP: BUBBLES: TO FLACK OR NOT TO FLACK What's New for Mar 08, 2002

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: "What's New" <whatsnew () aps org>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:38:12 -0500 (EST)
To: farber () central cis upenn edu
Subject: What's New for Mar 08, 2002

1. BUBBLES: TO FLACK OR NOT TO FLACK. An editorial by Don Kennedy
in the March 8 issue of Science, "To Publish or Not to Publish,"
describes his courageous stand in publishing a controversial paper
even though "it had become clear that a number people didn't want
us to publish this paper."  Last week WN revealed that Science
would carry an article by Taleyarkhan et al. from Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (WN 1 Mar 02), claiming evidence of d-d fusion
correlated with sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles in
deuterated acetone.  However, Shapira and Saltmarsh, also from Oak
Ridge, using purportedly superior detection and analysis
equipment, found no evidence for fusion.  Kennedy, it turns out,
was merely urged to delay publishing the Taleyarkhan result until
it could be accompanied by the Saltmarsh finding.  Instead,
Science accompanied the Taleyarkhan paper with a glowing
"Perspectives" article, a "News" report and an editorial.  Worse,
Science issued an embargoed press release.  A press embargo is a
device meant to suppress dissenting views the day a story breaks.
We at WN are not press, however, nor did our information come from
Science.  After WN broke the story, Science dropped its embargo.
Both sides, Kennedy's editorial concludes, "would do well to wait
for the scientific process to do its work."  But in the end, it
was Science that refused to wait until it had a balanced report.

------ End of Forwarded Message

For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/