6 Replies to “What Would We Do Without Peer Review?”

  1. Just curious…do 97% of the scientists that authored those papers agree that man made CO2 is causing global warming? 😉

    1. I met one charming young woman scientist and she was studying sex determination in sea turtles. They lay a bunch of eggs in a nest and the ones in middle where it is warmer become female and the ones on the outside become male. She could never get any funding for her work. Then she linked it to climate change. Since sea turtles sex is determined by temperature would warming beaches mean all females? OMG! Now if you think about for a minute, you’re talking about a local condition in a nest. The difference in heat is largely related to metabolism of the eggs in the nest. She openly admitted to me it was all nonsense and she did not “believe” in climate change but suddenly she was getting huge grants and offers from the big universities for tenure track positions. She was prepared to spew nonsense to get grants and justified it to herself by pointing out she was getting funding for her very important question of science, the puzzle she was dedicating her life to so that made it okay. That’s why 97% agree. Ask them privately you’ll hear something different.

  2. The grant system has corrupted science. 97% will agree with anything that is the latest high fashion of science no matter how stupid or wrong, if it will get them grant money. For a long time you had to have a line about how your work would lead to curing cancer. These days it’s climate change. They talk about it openly, what you need to do in your grant application tog et funded. Most scientists have become whores. Oh they cloak themselves in high sounding language about excellence and scientific integrity but they are just grant whores. If you want to find a real scientist look at the guy who never gets the big grants and publishes in only two bit edge of the pack journals with small readerships.

    1. You took the words right off my keyboard. I saw too much of that sort of thing while I was a grad student. It’s little more than getting a seat at the golden hog trough.

  3. Hey Justin and B. A.
    I have seen the tri councils in action, along with their willing university partners playing the grant game to the hilt, roping in provincial partners and other in kind contributors.
    Using peer review based on dubious criteria crafted for the trough du jour, be it climatic, cancerous, nano promising, or some such other genetic or biomedical horse manure du jour.