Reply #33: Every entity picks it's own editorial review panel

[bluedawg12]

this one appears to have picked it's own, as well.

That doesn't ring any alarms with me.

The issues for me would be:

a.) Are they qualified experts in their field?

b.) Are they truly independent in terms of no corporate funding for their role on the panel, or in RL?
i.) To qualify, many academic researchers are corporate funded- but, at least they are obliged to disclose those facts.

c.) Are they selected based on competence vs. ideology?
i.) Competence works, selection on the basis of any political POV, does not.

"BTW the GUT I alluded to has received plenty of peer review online and off."

On line peer review? Again, what is the e-journal that it was published in? Who is on the editorial board? What is the name of the e-journal?

Because online blogging is not formal peer review. Any more than this forum is.

You might argue that this is a form of peer review, admittedly, there are (likely- haven't seen any CV's) experts here, but the quality of feed-back varies from intelligent, if heated debate, to "cheese."

"Unfortunately many career students still cling to the antiquated notion that anything of value must be printed on paper."
That's a specious argument. We have discussed what defines a journal, and it is not the medium it is presented in.

You know, going back to when the RW fought tooth and nail against anthropogenic climate change one of the standard bearers was M.Cr*chton.
He even wrote a book about it, and was hailed as a voice of reason against "enviro" alarmists. He had plenty of review on line and off, many wrote referentially about him in the RW media, but, that still didn't make him a climatologist.


Good discussion- thanks everyone.

-Dawg