That its inclusion in a legitimate journal could lead people to doubt the rigor of every other academic article, ultimately eroding faith in science as a whole.
So, um, people should be aware that “published in a peer reviewed journal” doesn’t mean that something good science and that formal peer review is only a part of peer review. For finding out what the peers really think laymen are better served by reading science writers rocking their rolodexes at e.g. arstechnica or theatlantic.
Which is not to say that Science of the Total Environment should be publishing arrant nonsense; of course it shouldn’t be.
