Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cautious_Optimist who wrote (233302)	4/17/2022 4:00:07 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 362349

>> Anecdotal and un peer reviewed studies are not proof. Peer review contributes nothing, and I've made that case time and again. But it doesn't take away for an article to have been peer reviewed, so I will still refer to them if I believe the findings are solid. And I have. But Covid has decimated the peer review concept much as climate change did with the "Hockey Stick" articles. It is just meaningless. If you think peer review is important you are totally ignorant of the subject. **************** "So peer review is a flawed process, full of easily identified defects with little evidence that it works. Nevertheless, it is likely to remain central to science and journals because there is no obvious alternative, and scientists and editors have a continuing belief in peer review. How odd that science should be rooted in belief." ================= Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals - PMC (nih.gov)