"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

snip

Peer review is about deciding whether an idea should become a part
of
the
body of scientific knowledge, not whether it's good or bad for
society.
Some scientists really do have very strange ideas about their
importance.


Peer review is about deciding whether an article should be published
in
a
'reputable' journal. That's important to people whose careers depend
on
producing a flow of such published articles.


Sure, and once published whether or not others reference it will depend
on
many things, but once published it becomes possible. There are also the
trainspotting style - citation counters, who believe that if more peer
reviewed papers support some theory than refute it then that is also a
measure of something worthwhile

Not in my field.

Your field appears to be full of cabbages.