A little note about the gyromodel of life

Some days ago I write a little tumblrpost about Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life by Erik D. Andrulis. In that occasion I expressed my skepticism comparing Andrulis' theory with string theory. Today I would report a post written by John Timmer, that is more detailed, but he starts writing:
Physicists have been working for decades on a "theory of everything," one that unites quantum mechanics and relativity. Apparently, they were being too modest.
But for me the most important quote is the following:
Peer review isn't meant as a way to censor unpopular or radically new ideas. It is meant to ensure that publications meet minimal scientific standards (how minimal will depend on the journal), and it imparts a level of credibility to anything that passes review. As far as I can determine, this paper doesn't meet even minimal scientific standards. By giving it the credibility of having been peer-reviewed anyway, the reviewers arguably failed in their duty.
I see two consequences of this failure: first of all a possible loss of credibility for open access journals (and this is not a good thing), and a possible loss of credibility for some sites (like physorg.com) that republish official press release without criticism.
In this sense it could be a good occasion for a scientific network like Field of Science to gain a lot of regular readers in the next months (and in particular I hope to write with more regularity in the future...)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Markup Key:
- <b>bold</b> = bold
- <i>italic</i> = italic
- <a href="http://www.fieldofscience.com/">FoS</a> = FoS