3 ms·

I think their implication is that you'd simply make use of peer review without treating it as infallible.

• Rochus 6y ago
  Treating something or someone as infallible contradicts the basic principles of science.
  • shawnz 6y ago
    So then you must agree, "Peer reviewers of Nature did a bad job" is a poor dismissal of their criticisms
    • Rochus 6y ago
      That was my question; glad you saw it; it's still unanswered; providing testable evidence for a claim is another basic principle of science; if the article or the reviewers are wrong, the top commenter has to give them a chance to recognise that by providing evidence for review.
      • shawnz 6y ago
        I'm not following your point anymore. I wish you would just explain your criticism instead of making these snarky comments.
        • Rochus 6y ago
          What snarky comments? I asked a question. You even quoted it. There is no reason to become aggressive.
          • TomSwirly 6y ago
            All your comments are snarky! If you're polite and respectful to people, they respond better. Give it a try. :-)
            • Rochus 6y ago
              And your comment could be taken as condescending. I don't see how that adds anything to the discussion.