Modern science doesn't'have peer review! Peer review works within a community, scientists review each other's work to decide who to trust. But the public and

Modern science doesn't'have peer review! Peer review works within a community, scientists review each other's work to decide who to trust. But the public and funding agencies are not part of that review! Not even scientists in tangentially related fields (such as statisticians or methodology experts) are consulted. Furthermore, "peer review" is limited to pre publication. Follow up research by others has mininal effect on the impact of a paper on a scientist's career. So why to we believe or fund the results? Either we are not their peers and should not engage with them, or we should be reviewing their work as part of the publication process. We also have "peers" in criminal prosecution. Would you allow a criminal trial where only the scientist's colleagues were in the jury?