Logout 
Portal 
Forum
Search
Members
Help 
11-07-2017, 09:59 PM
Brian and Roger
American Geophysical Union publications are open access (open to public) 2 years after publication. Authors can pay for open access from their grants or their pockets. My 2013 paper on Palos Verdes (Los Angeles) region is open access (I think; I half forget). Authors can also post their papers on their web sites, or on ResearchGate, if they post a version they did before page proofs (or something like it). Earth Science is trying to move to Open Access, but someone has to pay the cost. Some other countries require Open Access if the work was done with national funding (or something like that)
For Roger, I rarely check the credentials of authors when I review a manuscript. The real problem is that it is difficult to write a good scientific paper. There is a particular style you pretty much have to do. For good journals and good reviewers you have to be convincing that you are likely to be correct about the main points. The style should also be readable (can be a problem for my manuscripts!). The figures have to be good. You have to read and be familiar with the relevant literature, and properly cite it.
Not easy! Not impossible for someone without "credentials". I work with someone who is a very high impact scientist with many many important publications. He does not have a graduate degree.
Chris
American Geophysical Union publications are open access (open to public) 2 years after publication. Authors can pay for open access from their grants or their pockets. My 2013 paper on Palos Verdes (Los Angeles) region is open access (I think; I half forget). Authors can also post their papers on their web sites, or on ResearchGate, if they post a version they did before page proofs (or something like it). Earth Science is trying to move to Open Access, but someone has to pay the cost. Some other countries require Open Access if the work was done with national funding (or something like that)
For Roger, I rarely check the credentials of authors when I review a manuscript. The real problem is that it is difficult to write a good scientific paper. There is a particular style you pretty much have to do. For good journals and good reviewers you have to be convincing that you are likely to be correct about the main points. The style should also be readable (can be a problem for my manuscripts!). The figures have to be good. You have to read and be familiar with the relevant literature, and properly cite it.
Not easy! Not impossible for someone without "credentials". I work with someone who is a very high impact scientist with many many important publications. He does not have a graduate degree.
Chris