So much for “peer review”.
Begs the question: What if your “peers” are a—holes???
These academics published so many fake papers they might have a long enough CV to get tenure.
These guys are exposing who the “peers” are.
Just goes to show that in an organization filled with idiots, idiots get their papers published.
When you stop and think about it, isn’t the whole concept of peer review a bit incestuous?