Sunday, January 29, 2012

Spectacular success! ZNA dumps Ji-Huan He

We wrote to Zeitschrift für Naturforschung A (ZNA) on 9 June 2010 and again on 15 May 2011. Prying Ji-Huan He from the editorial board is a major accomplishment, and was never likely to succeed. Crackpot Otto E. Rössler and his student Hans H. Diebner published a lot there. Jürgen Parisi, another co-author of Rössler, was and still is on the editorial board. Managing Editor Karin Pfeffer is from Tübingen, which is Rössler's university. ZNA was a stronghold -- a festering hell-hole -- of crackpottery. Even the infamous Mohamed El Naschie published there.

It may be that my postscript to the second email worried them:

Please make sure you follow the comments in this post. It is apparent from the tables of contents of recent issues of ZNA that Ji-Huan He has been responsible for the increasingly bad quality of papers accepted into ZNA. He is destroying VZN as you sit idly by.

Maybe you don't care about journal quality. That's hard for me to understand, but perhaps you're just cynical. You should at least be concerned for your jobs. A journal this bad cannot exist indefinitely.

ZNA is number 18 on our Master list of Ji-Huan He's editorial positions. The entry has been made red to reflect the firing.

(See the first comment below.)

Translate English to Arabic
محمد النشائى El Naschie Watch محمد النشائي El Naschie News محمد النشائى محمد النشائي All El Naschie All The Time محمد النشائى


  1. No way!

    Looking at the queue for the first 2012 issue, as well as the contents of the last 2011 issue, it's clear the damage is done. They're chockfull of homotopy bs.

    I propose a new name for the journal, to reflect their change in focus: Zeitschrift für Homotoforschung H. (H for 'He'.)

  2. Zeitschrift für Homotoforschung H. illustration added.

  3. This is not about El Naschie and his friends, so I'm not going to do a post about it, but this may be the worst life sciences paper ever written: Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life (PDF). I think so anyway. I have criticized life sciences papers in the past (about allometry) and readers have told me I don't know what I'm talking about. So you may have a different opinion. Case Western Reserve University put out a press release about it... but then quickly took it down. Not a good sign.

  4. From the above paper:

    "In the theory proposed herein, I use the heterodox yet simple gyre—a spiral, vortex, whorl, or similar circular pattern—as a core model for understanding life.... this theory challenges long-held assumptions, guiding philosophies, ad hoc models, cherished paradigms, ossified boundaries, and, quite regrettably, patience.... The gyromodel clarifies how a quantum has both wave and particle qualities.... The electrogyre unifies QM [quantum mechanics] and GR [general relativity].... the inner core of a planet is modeled as a macroelectrogyre.... The oxygyre models the Moon as a macroxyon that has a macroelectron within itself.... the RNA virus life cycle, when viewed in four dimensions, is revealed to be a ribovirogyre...."

    This is woo-woo horseshit from beginning to end. Here are some links about it. Astrobiology. Physorg. Tinfoil Palace. James Randi. Ars Technica.

  5. A commenter on thinks the following paragraph from p. 65 suggests it's a Sokal-type hoax.

    "Epistemological rupture. The philosopher Bachelard claimed that scientific history is replete with unconsciously constructed or immanent “epistemological obstacles,” that are eventually broken through and shed during “epistemological rupture [796].” I conclude that my theoretical work elicits a Bachelardian rupture of intradisciplinary noöspheres and interdisciplinary boundaries. Kuhn proposed a related concept of “paradigm shift” to explain the process surrounding worldview conversion during a scientific revolution [797]. Whether the advent of this theory elicits a Kuhnian gestalt switch is debatable, though such an iconoclastic event has been foretold [798-800]."

  6. Now Physorg has pulled their article about it. I wish I had saved it for the comments.

  7. Great! Probably the last issues full of homotopy bs were Ji-Huan's goodbye to his faithful readers. LOL

  8. We'll see. Shrink, thanks to you for kicking this off.

    Shrink dug up the email addresses for the editorial board in the first email. The Master List was embryonic.

  9. I always thought that journals should add more area editors for the emerging discipline of "Numerology"...

  10. ZNA was worth the effort due to its IF. I think He doesn't have any positions in such highly ranked journals anymore.

  11. You say that, shrink, as if IF is some serious measure of something measurable. That's like saying "ZNA is worth it because it has umpteen magical pony points!" ;)

  12. My comment doesn't imply that, Anonymous: it simply states that those few journals with IF (of which He was editor), were worth the effort more than other obscure journals.

    BTW: My position on IF is clear:

    The count of citations is widely used for ranking in science but - as the cases of El Naschie and He show - such a metric can be easily manipulated.