"The tradition of 'peer review' of articles published in professional journals has degenerated into almost total censorship." -- Halton C. Arp, astronomer, 2000
"Of course that market today needs the Internet to loosen the shackles of scientific censorship and control through anonymous peer review." -- Wallace Thornhill, physicst, October 2006
The Leftists are whining because peer-review censorship is unable to suppress every thought.
New Scientist: We need to fix peer review now.
Yesterday the UK parliament heard that studies at the University of Texas have shown that homeopathic remedies kill cancer cells while leaving normal cells intact.
The revelation came from David Tredinnick, who continues to use his position as a public representative to argue for more NHS spending on complementary and alternative medicines.
To my mind, the fact that this study was mentioned in parliament, and the statement that homeopathy can kill cancer cells is now a matter of public record, is a spectacular failure. But it is not a failure of politics or politicians: it is a failure of science.
Which definition of the word "fix" is in play here, I wonder? Perhaps it depends on the identity of the "failure of science"?
ReplyDelete