By Gary Robbins (San Diego Union Tribune)
A scientific journal has retracted a paper by a San Diego researcher who claimed that jets have been flying over the county and secretly emitting toxic chemicals that pose a public health hazard.
The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health said that it discovered that a paper by independent geophysicist J. Marvin Herndon contained mistakes and lacked scientific rigor.
The journal performed the review after critics challenged Herndon’s widely-stated belief that tanker-jets have been spraying coal fly ash into the troposphere “for geoengineering, weather-modification and climate-modification purposes.”
The paper was published in August and was supplemented by a news release in which Herndon claimed that “the consequences on public health are profound, including exposure to a variety of toxic heavy metals, radioactive elements, and neurologically-implicated chemically mobile aluminum released by body moisture in situ after inhalation or through transdermal induction.”
The news release included numerous photos purporting to show toxic coal fly ash chemtrails in the skies above San Diego.
Paul B. Tchounwou, the journal’s editor, issued a retraction on Sept. 2 that details Herndon’s mistakes. The retraction also says, “The language of the paper is often not sufficiently scientifically objective for a research article.”
Tchounwou did not explain why the journal failed to notice the paper’s lack of objectivity when it was first submitted for publication.
Herndon, 71, said in an email Sunday, “The retraction of my peer-reviewed and published scientific paper was based upon a systematic, aggressive attack by one or more individuals making blatantly false and/or pejorative remarks. I explain the circumstances in detail in the attached document that can also be downloaded: http://www.nuclearplanet.com/public_rejection.pdf
“You may or may not know of my communications with San Diego officials: http://www.nuclearplanet.com/emails.html
“The very aggressive campaign to have my two scientific papers on tropospheric coal fly ash retracted is good evidence that I am right on target. You may quote me as saying that I will continue to oppose the retraction until truth and reason prevail.”
Much of this controversy was brought to light by Retraction Watch, a blog written by Adam Marcus and Ivan Oransky, a pair of science journalists whose work has been causing a stir in academia. The two writers have starkly publicized the sort of retractions and corrections that used to receive little notice. Their work has raised questions about the integrity and completeness of scientific peer review.