If it's true, it is not libel
Mohamed El Naschie is suing Nature 'cause they accused him of abusing editor privileges (pdf) to self-publish poor quality papers.
Well, if the papers were reviewed by peers, it shouldn't be a problem to prove that, and the the case has merits, but otherwise there really isn't any case at all.
The number of self-publications in the journal, though, would make me bet that Nature is right on this one, though...
--
308-322=-14
November 4th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
Unfortunatelly the British libel law works the opposite way, if I am not mistaken. It is Nature who has to prove that El Nascshie's papers were not peer reviewed, not El Naschie who has to prove that his papers were peer reviewed.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
The El Naschie case is pretty grotesque. He published 322 papers in his own journal (Slashdot wrote about it last year, if you missed it). John Baez analyze a few of his papers here.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
Unfortunately, if he's suing in England, Nature probably don't stand a chance. See for instance http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6898172.ece
November 4th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Also, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/technology/20iht-libel21.1.9346664.html:
Britain is a legal refuge because of defamation standards rooted in common law. They essentially assume that any offending speech is false and the writer or author must prove that it is in fact true to prevail against the charge.
In the United States, with its First Amendment protection for free speech, the situation tilts in the opposite direction: To succeed, libel plaintiffs must prove that the speech is false and published with a reckless disregard for the truth.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Actually, according to UK laws, merely being true doesn't automatically mean a statement isn't libelous! A true statement can be libelous in the UK if it can be shown that it was disseminated in order to destroy the reputation of the target.
November 5th, 2009 at 7:54 am
Thanks for all the comments. Sorry they were kept in the moderation queue for so long -- I didn't get the usual mail notification for some reason ... I have disabled moderation again so it shouldn't be a problem in the future (it was on because my Akisme spam-filter was offline due to firewall issues but those are resolved now; without spam filtering moderation was necessary, trust me).
What you tell me about British law scares me a little bit. Well, a large bit, really.
Not so much that the burden of evidence is on the defendant rather than the plaintiff, but that truth is not a defense.
Nature didn't explicitly say that there were never any reviews, just that it didn't look that way and that the whole situation looks suspicious -- which I think everyone would agree to. Proving that this looks suspicious is just applied statistics; how common is it to have 322 papers published in your own journal? Pretty rare? Okay, then we reject the null hypothesis...
If it is libel to state this, then British law is broken...
November 17th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Thanks to Mikael, who posted the link to the Baez archive on my blog, El Naschie Watch, in his comment above. The litigious Dr. El Naschie is a source of great amusement to me and my readers.
November 30th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
It is not just a matter of funding which is behind the defamatory article in Nature. I think prestigious prizes also play a fundamental role. I read that somewhere on the net but strangely it was removed. The prize in question seems to be the Nobel Prize. Some say that not even the devil could have thought of something as harmful to science as the Nobel Prize. They reckon it is not the prize money itself but the publicity which the Nobel Prize brings. In turn this is translated into money. Noting the recent discovery of the sleaze at the Ivy Leagues in the US I am not astonished that this cash is badly needed. If this is true for Harford why should it not be true for the Einstein Inst. in Berlin or the University of Utrecht in Holland. The names involved with Mohamed El Naschie are quite interesting. Somebody wrote yesterday that he would not be astonished if a best seller comes out of this horrific story in the next few years. It is alright for some. The same writer said try as hard as he can, he simply cannot fathom how the Editor in Chief of Nature could allow this tabloid piece to be published in his journal. He must have his reasons or he had a very deep snooze. He added that he may have had too much respect for Nature just as he used to have for the Nobel Committee. This implies that he has none any longer which is interesting. Finally the writer noted that Mohamed El Naschie had no vested interest and certainly no materialistic interest in publishing his papers because he was sufficiently rich and famous before turning to theoretical physics. The author of this remarkable comment closed by noting that any successful engineer who leaves engineering to be become a theoretical physicist should have his head checked. In other words, he doubts the sanity of theoretical physicists, Mohamed El Naschie included.
December 4th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
In a memorable though slightly vintage BBC series from the 50’s and early 60’s called Lord Russell Speaks His Mind the moderator asked Bertrand Russell what he thought the most positive aspect of the British people was, particularly the English. Lord Russell answered without hesitation that British people are extremely kind, particularly the English. I am not astonished that British libel law is strict because it is faithful to the character of the English people. It is a pity that the American took a different attitude towards freedom of speech, confusing it with slander and cruelty let alone blackmail by journalists up to no good. I do not find El Naschie Watch a source of any amusement. It is a source of disgust and revolution. Regarding publishing 322 papers, you should understand that this is not what is being challenged in the High Courts of Justice. Not at all. What is being challenged is that El Naschie lied about his credentials and affiliations particularly with the University of Frankfurt. There is no doubt what so ever in the meantime that Schiermeier, the journalist of Nature has lied. Court documents say so. There is a great deal of speculation about why Schiermeier lied. Some of this speculations goes as far as saying that he was asked to write this article by certain elements in the establishment unhappy with or jealous of El Naschie. This is a very serious business. The fact that Nature has never ever published such a tabloid article before is lending credibility to the hypothesis that it is a conspiracy involving well established names. A second part of this conspiracy theory involves an article published last year in Scientific American about fractal spacetime without citing the work of any of the three scientists who developed it first, namely in chronological order Garnet Ord a Canadian, Laurent Nottale a Frenchman and Mohamed El Naschie, the Egyptian who lives in England but was educated in Germany. I am really thrilled to see the outcome of this case. Who will win at the end of the day, an invincible Institution or the truth? I do not think I need to say on which side I am. You guessed right. I am on the side of the freedom of science, not the freedom of defamatory press.
December 8th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
The conspiracy of John Baez, Renate Loll and their cat claws Christoph Drosser of Die Zeit and Querein Schermeier of Nature is out in the open. Of course this story will live in infamousy for as long as there are decent scientists who will not tolerate such sleeze. Mohamed El Naschie is innocent. You have framed him precisely because he is a Moslem, he is an Arab and he is a genius. Those who want to kill him are the same people who want to kill Hussein Barack Obama. That is his true name.
December 9th, 2009 at 8:48 am
The mind boggles...
December 11th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
Classic. Thomas, I linked to this thread, so don't you dare delete those comments. :)
December 25th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
El naschie keeps publishing junks in CSF for a quite long time and kept unnoticed by mentoring system of Elsevier which seems very odd. While it was so obvious from the far beginning that we have a crackpot.
The same applies to Cambridge university which allowed him to publish his articles for nearly ten years 1993-2001 using its affiliation, while, for sure, he wasn’t a staff member there. It is far from reality to imagine that people in Cambridge have been fooled for that long time.
December 25th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Looking for the numerous amazing articles of El naschie, I found a wonderful one whose title is
“P-Adic analysis and the transfinite E8 exceptional Lie symmetry group unification ”
M.S. El Naschie
King Abdullah Institute for Nano and Advanced Technology, KSU, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Volume 38, Issue 3, November 2008, Pages 612-614
Just reading the first sentence in the introduction which is
“One of the most amazing results in high energy physics is the T-duality discovered in the context of superstring theories by Witten [1] ”
But, for your surprise, the list of references you find no mention of any reference of Witten.
Reference [1] is just a paper of El naschie himself. Here is list
[1] M.S. El Naschie, A few hints and some theorems about Witten’s M theory and T-duality, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals (2005), pp. 545–548.
[2] A. Leonovich, Comments on E8 unification and P-Adic numbers. http:/www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xm1=/eareth/2008/
01/22/scieinstein122.xml (10/03/2008).
[3] M.S. El Naschie, Transfinite harmonization by taking the dissonance out of the quantum field symphony, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals (2007).
[4] M.S. El Naschie, High energy physics and the standard model from the exceptional Lie groups, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 36 (2008), pp. 1–17.
[5] M. Kaku, Introduction to superstrings and M-theory, Springer, New York (1999) see p. 385 in particular.
[6] M.S. El Naschie, Infinite dimensional Branes and the E(∞) topology of Heterotic super strings, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 12 (2001), pp. 1047–1055.
The first reference as already mentioned is El naschie paper. The big surprise about this paper is its tilte
“A few hints and some theorems about Witten’s M theory and T-duality” here again we find no reference to any of Witten’s papers . here is list of references of this paper ;
[1] E. Goldfain, Cantorian spacetime and unified field theory, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 23 (2005), pp. 701–710.
[2] M.S. El Naschie, A review of E-infinity theory and the mass spectrum of high energy physics, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 19 (2004), pp. 209–236
[3] M.S. El Naschie, Gödel universe, dualities and high energy particles in E-infinity, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 25 (2005) (3), pp. 759–764.
[4] El Naschie MS. On the cohomology and instantons number in E-infinity Cantorian spacetime. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, in press doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2005.12.019.
[5] M. Kaku, Strings, conformal fields and M-theory, Springer-Verlag, New York (2000).
[6] A. Khrennikov, Non-Archimedean analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers, London (1997).
[7] V. Vladimirov, I. Valovich and E. Zelenov, P-Adic analysis and mathematical physics, World Scientific, Singapore (1998).
Something more peculiar about the list of references, of the first paper, is that one of the references is just a comment on an article published in the Telegraph, unfortunately the comment has been deleted. Also the address of the first paper raises another question about the so many false affiliation of El Naschie. The address seems not to be related to his activities.
It is obvious that there is no kind of peer review for these papers even at the fromal level apart from the content.
One can guess that papers may be generated using a program of language generation like n-moles or n-grams or whatever kind of program used. I think, at least for me, that the ‘a b’ of scientific writing should fulfill certain basic criteria:
1- If you mention a paper of Witten (or any name) [], then one should put reference for that person in the square bracket.
2- If you have a paper titled with theory of some one, then the list of references should contain at least one reference for that guy.
I hope, by now, El naschie has a plenty of time to fix the bugs in the program generating papers, implementing these two mentioned rules in the code and acknowledge this blog for drawing his attention.
December 25th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
It is not important if El naschie is a phd holder or not.
The number of his papers is 350 or 1000 papers is also
immetrial. If one is allowed to write in his style without any
peer review one could publish 6000 papers in twenty years.
The main problems in his papers is they don’t make sense
whatever mathematically or physicaly.
About the address “King Abdullah Institute for Nano and Advanced Technology, KSU, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia” on
his recent papers is very supicious as it has no relation to his
activities.
On the Ninth International Symposium Frontiers of
Fundamental and Computational Physics 2008 had a lecture titled
“Average exceptional Lie group hierarchy and high
energy physics” where he claimed to be the director of
King Abdullah Al Saud Institute for Nano & Advanced Technologies
as evident from the affiliation mentoined below.
M.S. EL NASCHIE
King Abdullah Al Saud Institute for Nano & Advanced Technologies*,
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
*) Director
one can check
http://agenda.fisica.uniud.it/difa/getFile.py/access?co
ntribId=52&sessionId=32&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=9
Bu
t if you check the web page of King Abdullah Al Saud Institute for Nano & Advanced Technologies you don’t find his name listed in the Committee Members of Establishing King Abdullah Institute for NANO Technology and there is no mention for him at all. That
seems odd especially he is the director as he claimed.
One can check the web page for "Committees consultative sciencetisic"
http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_46.shtml
web page for "Supervisory Committee to King Abdullah Institute for Nanotechnology"
http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_63.sh
tml
Can the great man explain for us.
December 25th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
think that Elsevier is doing dirty jobs in scientific publishing. The CSF journal is owned by Elnaschie and Elsevier is getting money out of this apart from the journal subscription fees. El naschie pays for getting credibility of Elsevier and to have the chance to publish his great scientific ideas in journal hosted by a supposed reputable publishing house like Elsevier. There are other many similar cases in Elsevier.
El naschie keeps publishing junks in CSF for a quite long time and kept unnoticed by mentoring system of Elsevier which seems very odd. While it was so obvious from the far beginning that we have a crackpot.
The same applies to Cambridge university which allowed him to publish his articles for nearly ten years 1993-2001 using its affiliation, while, for sure, he wasn’t a staff member there. It is far from reality to imagine that people in Cambridge have been fooled for that long time. According to the following data base
http://www.engineeringvillage2.org
One can find:
17 articles where the affiliation is DAMTP, Cambridge, UK.
72 articles where the affiliation is Dept. of Appl. Math. & Theor. Phys., Cambridge Univ., UK
40 articles where the affiliation is Univ of Cambridge.
No prize for one who guesses at which journal those articles have been published.
It is not enough for Elsevier just to step down Elnaschie , they should explain how these things happened and what their future precautions to prevent such a misusing of editorial power.
On the other side, Cambridge people should explain how it was possible for El naschie to use its affiliation for a quite long time, harming their reputation without charging him and any legal action.
The papers of El naschie would be a permanent black record for both Elsevier and Cambridge for too long time in the future.
December 25th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
The great man El naschie in his recent CV
http://www.fikr7.org/WMS_Gallery/cv/naschie.pdf
His suspicious academic career
• Research Scientist, University College 1974, London, U.K.
• Associate Professor, KSU 1980, Saudi Arabia
• Distinguished Professor, New Mexico 1981, USA
• Professor, KACST 1985, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
• Director, KACST 1987, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
• Professor, Cornell 1988, Sibley School of Aeronautics & Astronautics, USA
• Professor, Solvay Institute for Physics & Chemistry 1990-2004, Free University of
Brussels, Belgium
• Professor, DAMTP 1991-2002, Cambridge, U.K.
• Professor, School of Electronic Engineering 2000-2004, University of Surrey, Guildford, U.K.
It is seems that the great man is fond of both false (pseudo) affiliations and
pseudo sciences. The great man is still not able to realize that his claims can be vindicated easily through internet, please, great man wake up, you are a completely dormant.
El naschie claimed to be the director, KACST (King Abdul Aziz city of science and Technology) during 1987, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
But if you look at the website of that KACST and the website of past directors, as usual, no mention for him.
http://www.kacst.edu.sa/aboutkacst/pages/pastpresidents.
aspx
The list is as the following
Prof. Rida M.S. Obaid, KACST President 1977 - 1983
Dr. Saleh Al-Athel, KACST President 1983 - 2007
The great man is a big liar or if he is telling the truth he must sue KACST.
December 25th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
This is just a typical abstract paper for one of the greatest member of E-infinity club namely Ji-Huan He and his company.
Hierarchy of wool fibers and its interpretation using E-infinity theory
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals,
In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 9 August 2008
Ji-Huan He, Zhong-Fu Ren, Jie Fan, Lan Xu
Abstract
Why do wool fibers show excellent advantages in warmth-retaining and many other practical properties? The paper concludes that their hierarchical structure is the key. Using E-infinity theory, its Hausdorff dimension is estimated to be about 4.2325, very close to El Naschie’s E-infinity dimension, 4.2360, revealing an optimal structure for wool fibers.
I suggest for the next time that author study tefal coating and how things can't stick to it. And how this related to its fractal properties and in turn to its Hausdorff dimension. That is could be an amazing application of El naschie's E-infinity theory.
Of course this can explain that El naschie is using anti-tefal to stick forever to Elsevier even if he has set to retire.
December 25th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
The astonishing thing about El naschie is that he
could survive for a quit long time in Europe and remained as a Cheif editor of CS&F for almost nearly twenty years.
Also, I think he managed to damage the reputation of Cambridge to some extent by publishing numerous non sense papers using its affiliation.
Furthermore, he damaged the reputation of Nobel laureate G. Thooft when he dedicated some of his non sense papers to G. Thooft - (On quarks confinement and asymptotic freedom Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 37 (2008)1289–1291)-
, surprisingly enough Thooft kept silent about this. I think even a third class physicist wouldn't be happy if El naschie dedicated one of his non sense paper to him, and for sure he would complain and sue El naschie.
It is a tempting suggestion to invoke the issue to sue Elsevier and El naschie for damaging the reputation of scientific publishing. I think that the respectable institutes, universities and research centers that paid for that junk CS&F must sue Elsevier and El naschie and asking for penalties.
December 25th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
El naschie deserves the name of the great corrupter.
A lone single handed and with his own money.
He has managed to corrupt Elsevier for almost twenty
years, 1992-2009. He has published few hundered (347)
non sense articles in CSF. Up till now, Elsevier can not
get rid of him. There is no article for El naschie in
the recent article of 2009 in CSF, which is a good sign.
But most of the articles trumpeting the E-infinity theory
and citing El naschie works.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/
science?_ob=PublicationUR
L&_tockey=%23TOC%235300%239999
%23999999999%2399999%23FLA%23&
_cdi=5300&_pubType=J&_auth
=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_ur
lVersion=0&_userid=10&
md5=faf5d2a06ff9be6c0d0126fdc479017c
No
t only that but the great man (El naschie) has also
managed to corrupt Cambridge for ten years.
According to the following data base
http://www.engineeringvillage2.org
One can find:
17 articles where the affiliation is DAMTP, Cambridge,
UK.
72 articles where the affiliation is Dept. of Appl.
Math. & Theor. Phys., Cambridge Univ., UK
40 articles where the affiliation is Univ of Cambridge.
No prize for one who guesses at which journal those
articles have been published.
All of these indicates the power of money not of self
publications or citations.
It is sad, that we lost the joke papers and now one can
not find any new paper for him. His papers are source of
infinite jokes.
The great man can establish his own publishing company
and calling it Elnaschievier to compete Elsevier in
publishing science fronteir.
We hope the great man not to waste a lot of time with
his socckpuppets and return producing lovely, joke
papers in Elnaschievier publishing house.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:07 pm
Mr. Anyone. If you would not be as stupid as you are you would be truly funny. Regrettably we know very well your real name. You are Said Salah Elnashaie the thief whose wife Shadia Shishini spent three years in a women’s prison for the stealing the money of Mohamed El Naschie’s mother. Her conviction was squashed after she served her sentence you your conviction for two year’s hard labor still stands. The last news I had you were hiding in Sinai with the Hashishine. Your are disgracing the University of Sinai and its virtuous President Dr. Ratep. I understand you are a direct descendant of some Hashishine. I wonder if you know that the word assassin derives from the word Hashash. I understand you are now specialized in character assassination. You and your friends, John Baez, Renate Loll and Christoph Drosser have the nerves to talk about character? You will be eternalized in the magna carta of no-good journalists and third rate chemical engineers. God, you disgust me.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:52 pm
Now, now, temper, temper. I can understand that Prof. El Naschie’s supporters are livid from the extent of the false accusations perpetuated by John Baez and his army. Never the less you are now committing the same mistake. You are turning a scientific discussion into a mud throwing match. I find that intolerable and disgusting from both sides.
January 16th, 2010 at 7:49 am
You can imagine what sort of junk could be published in CSF journal. You may not know that Huan is one of the great supporter of E-infinity theory and who nominated El naschie for a nobel prize!!!!
You can check yours self a typical paper for Huan using E-infinity theory, and I think a high school student can easily judge that this absolute trash.
Hierarchy of wool fibers and its interpretation using E-infinity theory
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals,
Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 41 (2009)1839 –1841
Ji-Huan He, Zhong-Fu Ren, Jie Fan, Lan Xu
Abstract
Why do wool fibers show excellent advantages in warmth-retaining and many other practical properties? The paper concludes that their hierarchical structure is the key. Using E-infinity theory, its Hausdorff dimension is estimated to be about 4.2325, very close to El Naschie’s E-infinity dimension, 4.2360, revealing an optimal structure for wool fibers.
Then the same article again with little modifications
Hierarchy of Wool Fibers and Fractal Dimensions
International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation,9(3),293-296, 2008
http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=103
7&context=ji_huan_he
Abstract
Wool fiber shows excellent advantages in warmth-retaining and many other practical properties possibly due to its hierarchical structure. Its fractal dimension of wool fiber is calculated which is very close to the
Golden Mean, 1.618. The present study might provide a new interpretation for the reason why wool fiber has so many excellent properties.
I think every reader (even a niave one) can notice the confilict between the two abstracts, in the first fibre wool has dimension 4.2325 (which is greater than the embedding space) and in the second it is 1.618. I hope El naschie can explain these remarkable results.
March 11th, 2010 at 4:57 pm
A Slovenian scientist and mathematician following Mohamed El Naschie expand the idea of mechanical oscillators. Many papers have been published on this subject by L. Marek-Crnjac. Take a two degree of freedom oscillator. Two masses connected by two linear springs. Write the equation of motion. Set the value for the masses as well as the spring constants equal unity. The secular equation is then simply a quadratic equation. The Eigen values are golden mean related. The only positive real Eigen value is the golden mean. Imagine now that you have infinitely many such oscillators connected together. Consequently you can estimate the Eigen value using two well known theorems on Eigen values. These are the Southwell theorem and the Dunkerly theorem. They correspond to what we have studied in school about joining electrical resistance of Ome’s law. When they are successive you add the inverses and when they are parallel you add them. Eigen values are frequencies. Frequencies are energy and energy is mass. Extrapolating the whole thing to quantum mechanics as argued by El Naschie and Marek-Crnjac you have another plausibility explanation for why the golden mean will pop up in any accurate measurement in quantum mechanics phenomenon.
March 11th, 2010 at 5:04 pm
Said I say it really with no hatred. You have damaged and ruined your future. Your name is mud among everyone who knows you. Call Ibrahim Fawzi. Call Amr Salama. Call any of the respectable Ministers who used to shake hands with you. They will run away now from you in horror. You know no limits. Your hate and jealousy of Mohamed is phenomenal. Abel and Cane is nothing but a small chapter in the epic you have written regarding how low someone can go regarding a family feud. Dont you know the word shame. Arent you ashamed of yourself and of all what you have caused to the good name of your family. Be sure I am not Mohamed. Be also sure that everytime I read your name or see your picture I feel infinite pain for what has become out of you. You just google your name in Egypt or abroad - try it and you find the truth about Said: http://www.saidelnashaie.blogspot.com. I wish I were dead before I see this day and quite honestly Said you are worth more dead than alive. You and Shadia, Jihan and Hisham as well as the crooked Ahmed Gaber of Chemonix, the fake environmental company and the first place in Guiness book of World Records of lawlessness.
March 21st, 2010 at 5:26 pm
A. Tolba, or should I call you Amr Elnaschai, won't you please leave Jihan alone!
November 6th, 2010 at 11:21 pm
Quite honestly I trust Prof. Mohamed El Naschie far more than I trust the judgement of Nature. I do not consider it outlandish to suggest a Nobel prize for El Naschie. Let me give you the rationale behind my conclusion. Surely you heard about the two genius Russian born scientists Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov. I was present at a talk involving the two lucky but deserving winners of the Nobel Prize of this year (2010). What they recounted speaks for the magazine Science and speaks against Nature. They said their paper was eventually published when they submitted it to Science. They added it was rejected twice by Nature. Something very unnatural is happening to Nature. Instead of publishing defamatory tabloid articles against El Naschie they should have at least published the paper of the two ingenious Nobel winners of this year. Nature also refused to publish the paper reporting the experimental discovery of the golden mean in quantum mechanics by the Helmholtz Center and Oxford University. It was again Science which published the article. A year or so later after the publication in Science, Nature overcame themselves to publish a short article about the article published in Science. When one of my colleagues who is aware of El Naschie’s papers and findings on the golden mean in quantum mechanics wrote a comment about El Naschie’s achievement and sent it to Nature, they refused even to acknowledge the bare facts. It is really becoming a personal war declared by Nature against El Naschie. The looser is the scientific community and science. In fact Nature is losing in a big way by publishing doubtful papers on climatology and ignoring fundamental and path breaking work because they will otherwise be forced to mention the name of El Naschie. It is unreal. Who thought Nature would behave in such a fashion? There seems to be something fundamentally wrong with the way Nature is being run at present. Of course Nature is the world’s most famous science magazine for everyone. The sooner they undertake self correction, the better it will be for everybody.