[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

Wow.......built up a big fat strawman to kick around? I never said there wasn’t good or valid science published ON Plosonline.....just that it is not a real journal.....it will get all kinds of decent science that is unworthy of real journal publication.

No, your argument was that PLoSOne isn't peer-reviewed.

Which isn't true.

Further, your argument was that something published in PLoSOne wasn't real science.

Which, again, isn't true.

Sorry, but there's no straw man here. You simply got caught making an idiotic argument, and are now trying to spin your way out of it.

I have an idea - how about you back up your assertion that PloSOne isn't a "real" journal with some argumentation that extends beyond the childish? For instance, you could start by explaining - with supporting evidence, why you think it is that publishing in PLoSOne is necessarily less demanding than publishing in another journal that's on dead tree. Further, you could explain why it is - beyond personal prejudice - that you think that the science that's published in PLoSOne is "unworthy" of "real" journal publication.

[ElectricStrawberry]

No, your argument was that PLoSOne isn't peer-reviewed

Making it up as you go, eh?

You USED TO BE better than that.

My entire argument...verbatim....

Why can’t Dr. Daniele Fanelli get his research published in a REAL journal?

Who said anything about peer-reviewed vs not? YOU DID.

Continue the manufacturing process....