| | | | |
| |
Critical discussion of papers and errors |
| |
Scientific discussion is important to distill the truth from papers published in the course of time. It is difficult for newcomers to find obvious errors of earlier papers quickly and I want to help them.
After the publication of a scientific paper, the authors should not be offended when other people voice criticism or offer different points of view. Also, friendships among sugar technologists should never be affected by scientific debates.
In my opinion, discussions at conferences don't suffice for resolving controversial issues, since there is typically only a limited amount of time to answer questions and eventually the chairman asks the participants to continue their discussions during the coffee break.
Difficult issues should be discussed in writing after a full paper has been published. But I think that publishing counter-evidence of or corrections to previous findings in journals is too delicate a matter. Therefore, I will use my website, which people outside this field might not be familiar with, to publish my point of view.
| |
| | |
G. Pollach
| |