“Peer review” science sham



James Taranto writes at the NY Times:  ”And it hardly needs to be said that peer review is a sham if papers that present alternative hypotheses are not even allowed into the process . . . What we now know about the ‘peer review’ process in this field indicates that this is a predetermined conclusion.”



Comments

Your email address is never published nor shared. Comments should be relevant, respectful, informative, and insightful. Opinions should be supported by appropriate analysis. All comments are moderated and will not appear online until approved by a moderator. Inappropriate comments will be edited or deleted without explanation. Required fields are marked *

*
*