With respect Sully, that's a hollow statement. Yes I know "peer reviewing" is a growth industry,
It is an industry standard. Which originated in the 1700s.
The point of the peer review process is to catch any flaws that may arise in sometimes research. A recent example I can think of is Wakefield. He published a paper linking the MMR vaccine to autism. It made it through the first process but slowly as other immunologists tried to replicate the results (a part of the peer review process) it became clear that something wasn't right with Wakefield's original findings. It was discovered that he falsified results and had a massive conflict of interest as he was trying to put forward his own vaccine to replace MMR. His paper has now been retracted by the Lancet.designed for mates to say nice things about what their mates write, in the expectation that some day in the future the situation will be reversed!
They were. Even the Wright Brothers showed off their flying contraption to the world. If it didn't work their peers would have said "Well that doesn't work".How the hell were great inventions created without being peer reviewed?
It is essential throughout the entire scientific process. Also why are you putting quotation marks around scientists? You are either trying to emphasise that they are scientists (which is the wing way to do it" or you don't consider them actual scientists. Which is it?It's just a bloody excuse to try and eliminate alternate thinking. A very unhealthy practice Sully, and one which, I as a creative thinker don't subscribe to. Perhaps it becomes 'justified' when "scientists" are approaching the end of their current funding, and are looking to secure a new "grant".
I'd like to see you tell this to Stephen Hawking, Buzz Aldrin, Marie Curie, Louie Pasture, Albert Einstein or Thomas Edison.You may be happy to be "one of the mob" and to live your life without straying "beyond the square" in case you may get rebuked. That shows a weakness of character on your part! Perhaps you are frightened of failure.
I'm fairly sure you're Gish galloping here, I'll have to check up on my logical fallacies but they are all irrelevant examples as they aren't conducting scientific studies.Were William Shakespeare's plays peer reviewed, was the Mona Lisa peer reviewed, ("oh, shit Vincent you can't paint her, she's a nobody"), were the works of Banjo Paterson and Henry Lawson peer reviewed, ("no one wants to read crap about gum trees, bush rangers and sheep"),
Sir Alexander Flemming published his discovery of penicillin and it's antibacterial in 1929, in the British Journal of Experimental Pathology. Where it would have been peer reviewed before it was published and then it would have been further reviewed and the experiment repeated by more of his peers.was the discovery of penicillin peer reviewed, (ah, yuk, that Petri dish has got mold growing all over it, toss it out before one of the proffessors sees it"),
irrelevant but I'm pretty sure the Pope of the time didn't like what he was doing then Michaelangelo would have been told about it.were the paintings on the ceiling of the cistine chapel peer reviewed, ("not up there Michelangelo, no one will see them, you idiot"),
You have totally misunderstood the peer review process. Go have a thorough read of the Wikipedia page about it or there is a really good article on How Stuff Works http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/scientific-experiments/scientific-peer-review2.htm .were the plans of the Sydney Opera house per reviewed? Well not originally, but they were later, and as a result, we have a lesser building. Was of the invention of the steam engine, electricity, the telephone, or the planned voyages of Capt. James Cook all peer reviewed no, no, no.Who peer reviewed Edmund Hillary's ascent of Mt Everest Sully?Most likely all of these were. Maybe not to the same standards of today but they would have been.From what you say, the bloke should never have set out into unknown (non-peer reviewed) territory!Didn't need to be but do you really think he didn't speak to his mountain climbing buddies or to other guys who tried to find out what they did wrong
You seem to be saying "don't try anything, or write about anything with out first arranging "back-up", in case you make a mug of yourself!
I'm off to bed to do some "creative thinking", because you're making me angry!!