Peer review was developed to reduce the inevitable biases of the individual mind.
Multiple reviewers also help keep each other honest.
Every paper I have submitted for publication has been returned for revision. The peer review process, in my cases, has greatly improved my papers. The reviewers have pointed out errors that I missed and flaws in my arguments. In some cases a reviewer has disagreed with my methods or conclusions and there has been back and forth discussions that led to clarity.
When you write about something that is really new or that challenges widely held views, you had better really have your shit together. Your materials and methods and your data and discussion need to be rock solid and your presentation needs to be easy to understand.
The peer review process is about making papers as good as they can possibly be, not rejecting them because of bias or to suppress dissenting views.
It is not perfect, but without it scientific knowledge could not reliably be passed on.
What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
™ Version 4.2
