Änderungen

Als aus [[Truther]]kreisen das "feature" vermehrt als angeblicher Beweis für Verschwörungstheorien zum 11. Septermber 2001 zitiert wurde, reagierten die Herausgeber mit einer gemeinsamen Erklärung:

Als aus [[Truther]]kreisen das "feature" vermehrt als angeblicher Beweis für Verschwörungstheorien zum 11. Septermber 2001 zitiert wurde, reagierten die Herausgeber mit einer gemeinsamen Erklärung:

:''Regarding the recent developments on social media, we would like to inform the public that neither the European Scientific Journal, ESJ, nor the European Scientific Institute, ESI have published content on 9/11 attacks.'' und später: ''EPN is a magazine that publishes a range of news and views to stimulate discussion – unlike peer reviewed research which would be published in a scholarly journal. EDP Sciences [their parent company] follows the most rigorous peer review standards for its journals of which EPN is not one.<br>As a magazine, the editorial policy of EPN is to publish news and views, which are sometimes controversial. EDP Sciences recognizes that the article discusses some speculative and controversial issues. However EPN and EDP Sciences believe that the best (and the most scientific) way to settle such issues is to publish them and have an open discussion with all due arguments in which the truth will finally emerge. A counter article is to be published by EPN in the next issue.''

:''Regarding the recent developments on social media, we would like to inform the public that neither the European Scientific Journal, ESJ, nor the European Scientific Institute, ESI have published content on 9/11 attacks.'' und später: ''EPN is a magazine that publishes a range of news and views to stimulate discussion – unlike peer reviewed research which would be published in a scholarly journal. EDP Sciences [their parent company] follows the most rigorous peer review standards for its journals of which EPN is not one.<br>As a magazine, the editorial policy of EPN is to publish news and views, which are sometimes controversial. EDP Sciences recognizes that the article discusses some speculative and controversial issues. However EPN and EDP Sciences believe that the best (and the most scientific) way to settle such issues is to publish them and have an open discussion with all due arguments in which the truth will finally emerge. A counter article is to be published by EPN in the next issue.'' (siehe: [https://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/abs/2017/01/epn2017481p18/epn2017481p18.html])

Auch snopes befasste sich mit dem Artikel.<ref>https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/journal-endorses-911-conspiracy-theory/</ref>

Auch snopes befasste sich mit dem Artikel.<ref>https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/journal-endorses-911-conspiracy-theory/</ref>