WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

241

(post is archived)

[–] 6 pts

Agreed, the magical incantation of “peer review” just means mutual masturbation.

[–] 4 pts

Theoretically it would be fine if people were actually at least trying to use the method correctly. In some completely apolitical fields that can’t be commodified are fine. You should be able to “trust the experts” in a “perfect world” and those experts should be actually reviewing and critiquing each other and not just siting them as a source for jerk off points. But yeah, anything to do with sex/race can be completely discarded from modern academia. There’s just no fucking way anyone is going to be honest about shit like that in the west. Maybe Eastern Europe or Asia where they aren’t completely blinded by egalitarianism and universalism.

[–] 1 pt

Not to mention: Many journals refuse to even look at any paper that could be considered controversial.
They say so themselves. - Meaning it will never even GET to peer review, because it's dismissed if it could be considered controversial.

[–] 0 pt

And NIH would never fund anything that looked into a sacred cow.

The irony of appealing to authority (of the masses) as justification for science shouldn’t be ignored.