Gatekeepers of Science
Timothy Birdnow
My father-in-law e-mailed me this. It presents an interesting take on the problems with peer-review under the current system and how bad work ends up being published, while good work is often suppressed.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/09/publish_or_perish_peer-review050681.html
The article mentions the Spencer-Braswell brouhaha, which I wrote about at American Thinker recently.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/the_warmists_strike_back.html Corruption of peer review and pressuring editors has become standard "gatekeeper" fare in recent years - and is at odds with the real meaning of science.
The author advocates for the release of papers openly on the internet with open comments rather than the current system where editors choose expert reviewers to give a thumbs up or down. This way everyone can see it (and for free rather than pay to critique) and the paper can stand or fall of it's own weight.
Not a bad idea.
My father-in-law e-mailed me this. It presents an interesting take on the problems with peer-review under the current system and how bad work ends up being published, while good work is often suppressed.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/09/publish_or_perish_peer-review050681.html
The article mentions the Spencer-Braswell brouhaha, which I wrote about at American Thinker recently.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/the_warmists_strike_back.html Corruption of peer review and pressuring editors has become standard "gatekeeper" fare in recent years - and is at odds with the real meaning of science.
The author advocates for the release of papers openly on the internet with open comments rather than the current system where editors choose expert reviewers to give a thumbs up or down. This way everyone can see it (and for free rather than pay to critique) and the paper can stand or fall of it's own weight.
Not a bad idea.
posted by Timothy Birdnow | 4:34 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home