•Archive Freedom News

•Post Comments
 on our Forum

•Case Histories of Suppression

•Academic Abuse

•Anonymous Victims

•Contact your Representative

•Contact Us

•Home

Physics Journals that Encourage New Thinking:

Apeiron

Progress in Physics

Brian Josephson has written the following in response to a letter by Ginsparg (April 2014)

Scientist blacklisting practice is now adopted by peer reviewed physics journals.  Carlos Castro Perelman reports.

Correspondence with Cornell re the unsatisfactory management of the physics preprint archive,  Compiled by Nobel Laureate Brian Josephson.

New Article Exposes Corruption of Science in America (2011)

Radio Interview of Carlos Castro Perelman speaking about suppression by Arxiv.org (May 23, 2005)

May 10, 2005  New Energy Times story (Issue No. 9):

ArchiveFreedom.org Founded to Fight Scientific Censorship

February 24, 2005 correspondence letter to Nature sent by Nobel Laureate Brian Josephson in response to the November 25, 2004 Nature news item, also copied below.

Correspondence

Sir -- Your News story "Rejected physicists instigate anti-arXiv site" (Nature 432, 428 - 429; 2004) reports a response from Paul Ginsparg, the founder of the preprint server arXiv.org, to criticisms of its publication policies.  Ginsparg states that the rules governing who can and cannot publish are clearly stated on the site, and that the archive is designed for "communication among research professionals, not as a mechanism for outsiders to communicate to that community".
     The cases documented by myself and others on the ArchiveFreedom website show that there is more to the story.
     The exclusion of particular individuals and particular ideas from arXiv appears to me to be deliberate.  If a rule can be invoked in support, however tenuous the link, the rule is quoted; otherwise, submissions are simply 'deleted as inappropriate'.  For example, having stated that a very distinguished physicist's strong support of a submission carried no weight because this physicist "was not intimately familiar with the work in question", the moderators simply ignored subsequent support from an endorser with publications on the same subject.
     In another example, the moderators' response to the information that more than one eminent physicist had an interest in a subject that they wished to bar was: "We are always thrilled to hear when people find an avocation that keeps them off the streets and out of trouble."
     ArXiv has become a vital communicative resource for the physics community.  The moderators' attitude to any challenge to conventional thinking is likely to result in the loss to science of important innovative ideas.  Radical changes are required in the way the archive is administered.

Brian D. Josephson
Department of Physics,
University of Cambridge,
Cambridge CB3 0HE, UK

[WASHINGTON] Researchers who feel they have been unfairly excluded from the arXiv physics preprint server now have a new home on the Internet.

     The 'archive freedom' site, developed by a handful of frustrated researchers, hosts the stories of physicists who, they claim, have been "blacklisted" by arXiv's operators at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York. The site includes information about Robert Gentry, a geophysicist formerly at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. Gentry, a Seventh Day Adventist and creationist, lost a legal action this March in which he had accused arXiv of religious discrimination in rejecting his papers on an alternative to the Big Bang theory (see Nature 428, 458; 2004).
     Paul Ginsparg, a physicist at Cornell who founded arXiv in 1991, defends the archive's policies and says the rules governing who can and cannot publish are clearly stated on the site. The archive is not a fully open forum, he adds, and is designed for "communication among research professionals, not as a mechanism for outsiders to communicate to that community"