💯 with you on this.

We also do preprints 100% of the time, but academic incentives are baked AF. Not ‘publishing’ means a large proportion of other academics simply won’t read or cite your work as they don’t believe in preprints. Additionally, funding bodies care about prestige publishing in top ranked journals, so if you don’t do this, the grant pool you have access to will be smaller.

The incentives need to change, where journal venue is irrelevant, or weighted far less than it is.

This comic is partially right. If you pay, you get open access, so no cost for readers. If you go old-school you don’t pay and the article is paywalled. Terrible system either way, but open access is necessary nowadays, as otherwise you will get cited less

True. A good way around this is to test ideas across multiple people. N=1 is just bad science.

And also asking: “but shit how, specifically?”

Not saying it’s easy

You don’t need their permission to write it up yourself

It’s really brand dependant. Honestly recommend trying brands till you find a good couple. Some oat and almond are smooth AF. I like Vitasoy and So Good, for example. Not a shill, just took brute forcing brands.

Everyone is always talking about spider silk as ropes. What about DNA huh? Mass strawberry extraction for a DNA space elevator when?

Absolutely not true. Fungi are weird but not this weird. Citation please

Open access credits is a fantastic idea. Unfortunately it goes against the business model of these parasites. Ultimately, these businesses provide little to no actual value except siphoning taxpayer money. I really prefer eLifes current model but it would be great if it was cheaper. arXiv, Biorxiv provides a better service than most journals IMO

Also I agree with the reviewing seriously and twice as often as publishing. Many people leave academia so reviewing more can cover them.

Three robust genetics papers using different sequences and genes, each time place it as a sister group to Archosauria:

248 nuclear genes (187,026 nucleotide sites): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3473239/

1145 ultraconserved elements (UCEs) and their variable flanking DNA: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2012.0331

1,113 single-copy coding genes, robustly indicated that turtles are likely to be a sister group of crocodilians and birds: https://www.nature.com/articles/ng.2615

This level of genetic evidence is an overwhelmingly strong signal, regarding relationships and recent common ancestry to extant species. I would say it is undeniably strong. You cannot possibly get evolutionary convergence over this many genetic loci.

Maybe we’re not talking about the same thing? I was thinking about the diapsid debate, where genetic evidence is overwhelmingly strong in favour for diapsid evolution Mitochondrial DNA evidence: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC24355/ Micro RNA evidence: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21775315/

Tbh a core multi gene ML tree to all other reptiles would prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt, maybe someone’s done that already but I haven’t been able to find it.

deleted by creator

Origin of life matters to a lot of people I think. RNA vs other self-replicating molecules? Moon-based tidal PCR? Cell formation etc.

I think there are so many new and great ideas in this space but you have to consider how science is funded. Funding bodies and reviewers want incremental research that is safe. This has led to our current situation. Phage therapy has been around for so long but is only in the last 10 years gained creditability and treated as a path to take. Ultimately, antimicrobial resistance is incredibly solvable even at a policy level and definitely across many scientific levels. But it requires more cooperation than farms, pharmacies, hospitals, states and countries can muster.

Genomics makes this answerable though? It’s just a matter of whether DNA is preserved or not in fossils. Genomics is more reliable than comparive anatomy. Comparative genomics can accurately place turtles in animal phylogeny. Sorry if I misunderstood your post. Or am I wrong here?

QR code for the DOI would be better IMO

Prion vaccines would work for sure. Their rarity makes it not all that worthwhile as a public health measure

Cations are pawsitive? Nawwww

That’s why you get a theoretical degree in physics

The Omelas generator

Depends on the publishing method you choose. If you want free for readers, authors pay. If you want free publishing, readers pay. Reviewers never get paid. Editors get paid shit. Journals profit massively for doing barely anything. Terrible in all directions. Preprint servers are the future