It's a commentary that scientific papers are inscrutable and a slave to form, over intelligible content. I find it a weak argument. The author's conference pres

It's a commentary that scientific papers are inscrutable and a slave to form, over intelligible content. I find it a weak argument. The author's conference presentation of it, though, is brilliant, a masterpiece. I'd always thought it was an example of how peer reviewed journals are scammy. That this paper got accepted as peer reviewed science of some sort. But while of course peer reviewed science isn't objective (there are studies on this, peer reviewed naturally), this apparently isn't that. It dates to 2003. I'm so surprised to see new commentary on this (blogs and what not) in 2021 and even later. I mean actual commentary and attempt to derive some insight from it on independent blogs/journals. Not just repeated link farming.