Science Magazine Retracts NASA Astrobiology Paper – But Only After 15 years
How did your country report this? Share your view in the comments.
Diverging Reports Breakdown
Science Magazine Retracts NASA Astrobiology Paper – But Only After 15 years
Science magazine is retracting a NASA paper they published 15 years ago – “A Bacterium That Can Grow by Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus“ – but they are not saying exactly why they are doing so – other than a new standard they just invented. And it took them 15 years to figure this out. “At NASA, the Gold Standard of Science is at the heart of our scientific discoveries that help us to better understand our solar system, and our place in it, for the benefit of all humanity.” – NASA associate administrator, Science Mission Directorate Nicola Fox.“Since Science has not applied this new standard across the board and has singled out this particular paper alone that was published15 years ago, NASA does not condone or support the retraction decision made by Science. The agency encourages Science to reconsider its retraction to protect the integrity of the scientific process in action’ – Fox.
Update: see below. Science Magazine is trying to bully me. Keith’s note: Science magazine is retracting a NASA paper they published 15 years ago – “A Bacterium That Can Grow by Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus“ – but they are not saying exactly why they are doing so – other than a new standard they just invented. And it took them 15 years to figure this out. Statement from NASA associate administrator, Science Mission Directorate Nicola Fox: (more below)
“At NASA, the Gold Standard of Science is at the heart of our scientific discoveries that help us to better understand our solar system, and our place in it, for the benefit of all humanity. We have, and will continue to be, open and transparent in our communications on results that we have funded, even if results are found to be incorrect. The change in policy at the journal, Science, to retract research publications due to a disconnection between the data and the published conclusions is unprecedented and upends the current standards in the research and scientific fields.
Since Science has not applied this new standard across the board and has singled out this particular paper alone that was published 15 years ago, NASA does not condone or support the retraction decision made by Science. The agency encourages Science to reconsider its retraction to protect the integrity of the scientific process in action, the value of pre-publication peer review, and reinforce those who publish intellectually risky results for the benefit of the world.”
“NASA-Funded Astrobiology Research Discovers Earth Life Built With Arsenic” 2 Dec 2010
UDPATE: Oh well @ScienceMagazine is trying to bully me. Here is the email exchange:
“Dear Keith, I am writing you from the press office at AAAS-Science regarding the NASA Watch story https://nasawatch.com/astrobiology/science-magazine-retracts-nasa-astrobiology-paper-but-only-after-15-years/ and X post here: https://x.com/NASAWatch/status/1948429566453973238 The story relates to the Science Retraction and author eLetter which will be published by the journal Science today at 2pm US ET, and are embargoed until that time. We have been working with many journalists to respond to questions related to this embargoed content. They are each waiting to post their stories until the embargo-lift time. We request that the NASA Watch story (and related social post) be taken down immediately. They could be reposted at 2pm US ET. We do not see you among our registrants. May we ask how you came upon the embargoed Science retraction and embargoed author eLetter response? Stories related to research published in the journal Science are embargoed until 2:00 p.m. US ET on Thursday unless otherwise noted and are not to be placed in the public domain, via subscriber distribution, newsstand sales, online postings or other methods, prior to the exact embargo-release time. The embargo protects the credibility of the research entrusted to us for publication and ensures a level playing field for journalists in developed and developing nations. Thank you for your urgent attention to this embargo matter. My colleagues and I at SciPak and EurekAlert! look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible. Regards, Meagan Phelan”
My response
“Excuse me but I have not posted your story. I posted a statement from NASA – that NASA sent to me – unsolicited – minus any “embargo” stated or implied. I am not in receipt of any embargoed news items from AAAS, Eurekalert or Science Magazine – nor have I ever been. I am not on your embargoed media release list or any other list. Check your mailing list. You cannot threaten me for breaking an embargo on materials I simply have no access to. And you want me to reveal my sources? Fat chance. Have a nice day. Keith“
Update: It is a little strange for SCIENCE to take 15 years to do an about face on the 2010 NASA Arsensic article given the pre-release hype that they put in their ‘SciencePak’ emailer that went out in advance. They even wrote a “kids version’ of this article! (screen grab below)