trakar- have you examined the story behind these two pictures? one is the faulty paper that made the front page of Nature and the other is the paper that destroyed the use of faulty methodology in that first paper. which one got more publicity? which one went through peer review which actually looked at the paper? and most importantly, which paper didnt get retracted from Nature and which paper couldnt get published in Nature?
And even more importantly which paper was reviewed by the author of the original study? A clear violation of the peer review process and ethics in general? Trakar could care less what the evidence is, he is a blind fool following other blind fools who are in it either for money or power.