If the author is to be believed, the flaws of the paper were numerous, obvious, and fatal. Meaning, easy to spot in five minutes by any reader with a bit of do

If the author is to be believed, the flaws of the paper were numerous, obvious, and fatal. Meaning, easy to spot in five minutes by any reader with a bit of domain knowledge. Those are not subtle traps. Now, while I understand how journals can assume good faith, they should never assume competence. They are supposed to make sure the paper is good, dammit! If they let that one slip through, they are bound to let genuine fatal mistakes slip through. No matter what, papers should go through actual peer review before publication. This study, if conducted the way I have read it, is solid evidence that many journals do not do that. They broke trust in the first place.