The arguments against peer-review are the most absurd I have ever heard. You might as well say that the Earth is flat because the photos could be illusions, and that the Earth is 6,000 years old because carbon dating is not valid, and that Bob Dylan discovered America, not Columbus, because he had a dream about it.
All this because you are against peer-review as a way to find common acceptability in society. Which is its purpose. Nothing else works, everything else can lead to war and destruction of civilization. People who are against peer-review ALWAYS have an ego-driven alterior motive, and that quote that Richard cited, is so pompous it reeks of ego-driven wannabe Uberlord. OffWorld
