Mr Jack wrote:
...Peer review is not a fundamental part of science but rather a method of ensuring that work performed is really valid science. Research does not become science when it undergoes peer review, and those who worked before the widespread introduction of peer review were not failing to perform scientific work because of this absence.
Oh, contrare! Peer review IS a fundamental part of science. Every scientific researcher knows that in spades. I would hate to see the "science" that comes out of no peer reviews. Creationism, cold fusion, and curing cancer with vitamin C are good examples of where peer reviews were fundamentally necessary.
”Hoot Mon
Edited by Hoot Mon, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
