He's suggested making revisions as an alternative to retraction. His paper has been censored which means he's not hearing constructive criticism. If you knew what corrections were required then presumably he would make them.
None that I'm aware of. He said words to the effect that the paper wasn't perfect but none ever are.
He said words to the effect that he stood by the methodology and by his conclusions. Many academics have OCPD with perspective taking deficits.
They're on the autism spectrum and it limits their ability to identify weaknesses in methodology and conclusions.
He indicated, as I perceived it, a willingness to take on board constructive criticism and to address points that could be demonstrated to warrant addressing.
Of course, it could also be that his position was analogous to that of the main character in this very brief but humorous film at the link below from Dr. Robert Malone substack.
If you're not on the autism spectrum you may enjoy it and also understand the metaphor and how it relates to Skidmore's position.
We'll find out at the trial. Skidmore is going to seek discovery to see what criticisms the editorial board may think they have. He's then going to put them on the stand and hammer them. They'll have to answer questions under penalty of perjury. And so will he. But he's not fazed. Steve Kirsch is funding the lawsuit. Springer will have to pay Skidmore's costs. I hope they're not only forced to reverse the retraction but that he also takes them to the cleaners. This corrupt conduct is going to backfire badly on the editorial board. Their name will be mudband Skidmore's paper will get lots of publicity.
Defamation, and breach of contract. All I know is at the link below:
"It's time we hold these people accountable; let the lawsuits begin. I'm going to pay for the lawsuit to sue Springer and their corrupt editorial board at BMC Infectious Diseases for their decision to retract the Skidmore paper; the most popular paper in their history."
That would be great - what corrections has Skidmore done? How has he reacted to the the critique, besides claiming to be the victim?
He's suggested making revisions as an alternative to retraction. His paper has been censored which means he's not hearing constructive criticism. If you knew what corrections were required then presumably he would make them.
What basis is there for your presumption?
It's "there" not "their" David.
That is such a basic error of written expression that I must seriously question your intelligence.
The basis for my presumption is that Dr. Skidmore himself suggested making revisions as an alternative to retraction.
It appears that you have a comprehension deficit.
I hope this does not reflect the standard of your published work although I suspect it does.
Thank you for the correction. I'll ignore the insulting tone.
What corrections did Skidmore feel are needed?
None that I'm aware of. He said words to the effect that the paper wasn't perfect but none ever are.
He said words to the effect that he stood by the methodology and by his conclusions. Many academics have OCPD with perspective taking deficits.
They're on the autism spectrum and it limits their ability to identify weaknesses in methodology and conclusions.
He indicated, as I perceived it, a willingness to take on board constructive criticism and to address points that could be demonstrated to warrant addressing.
Of course, it could also be that his position was analogous to that of the main character in this very brief but humorous film at the link below from Dr. Robert Malone substack.
If you're not on the autism spectrum you may enjoy it and also understand the metaphor and how it relates to Skidmore's position.
https://youtu.be/Zh3Yz3PiXZw
So his talk of making correction is just that - talk?
We'll find out at the trial. Skidmore is going to seek discovery to see what criticisms the editorial board may think they have. He's then going to put them on the stand and hammer them. They'll have to answer questions under penalty of perjury. And so will he. But he's not fazed. Steve Kirsch is funding the lawsuit. Springer will have to pay Skidmore's costs. I hope they're not only forced to reverse the retraction but that he also takes them to the cleaners. This corrupt conduct is going to backfire badly on the editorial board. Their name will be mudband Skidmore's paper will get lots of publicity.
On what grounds? In what court?
Defamation, and breach of contract. All I know is at the link below:
"It's time we hold these people accountable; let the lawsuits begin. I'm going to pay for the lawsuit to sue Springer and their corrupt editorial board at BMC Infectious Diseases for their decision to retract the Skidmore paper; the most popular paper in their history."
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/its-time-we-hold-these-people-accountable
I guess we'll have to wait and see what the legal filing actually claims.