The Internet killed Peer Review bottlenecks

“Peer reviewed research” is an argument from authority again. “And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness” –1 John 5:19.

Let’s let Michael Crichton chime in, quoted on James Watt’s web site:

Rather, I want to discuss the history of several widely-publicized beliefs and to point to what I consider an emerging crisis in the whole enterprise of science-namely the increasingly uneasy relationship between hard science and public policy.

Read what he said about consensus. The cheap data communications revolution of the Internet has made Peer Review DEAD.

Let it sink in. So-called “PEER REVIEW” IS DEAD as a bottleneck now. DEAD.

The good part of Peer Review is accomplished on the Internet, for as long as the authorities keep their grimy nasty oppressive hands OFF.

Scholars keep going, but the smartest people in the audience are listening to their peers. Arguments from authority and system “Establishment” credentialing is a naked emperor.

Forrest, the most prominent amateur scientist put NASA to shame with a $300 interferometer.

Dr. Russel Humphreys put NASA to shame with his spot-on bulls’ eye prediction of the magnetic field strength of the outer planets based on specifics in Genesis One.

Crichton bested Al Gore on “global warming” with science.

Climategate exposed “peer review”.

Royal fellowship recipient denounced his own experience with “peer review” most scathingly, though they had to publish it finally, after two rounds more than anybody else with his variable speed of light theory. (He also did not hide the fact that he used the research of a certain creation scientist in Australia.)

Somebody posted a “proof of P versus NP” on the Internet, and it was peer-reviewed by thousands and refuted within 24 hours.

The same authoritarian arguments from authority are used against KJBO. It is their strongest argument too.

“Have any of the rulers believed [in this]”?


%d bloggers like this: