Recent content by SleepyTyrant

Peer review does not judge on the accuracy of the research per se (it would need to be wrong in an obvious way to be rejected for that. At least when being reviewed for publication.) And when errors are found after publication, ammendments are made. This just ensures that an expert or 2 in that...

There's nothing wrong with that; as long as they state that. Which is typically required as far as I'm aware.

Non-sequiturs are objectively bad logic, correct?

How exactly is it that you think peer review functions? Step by step.

Of course you wouldn't want this to devolve into codependency, that's perfectly normal. My reccomendation is set boundaries. Not saying you should stop participating, but you need to define the limits on what you're both comfortable with and come to a compromise.

Sounds like an undefined question.

Science corrected science tho. Never claimed peer review was perfect. Sometimes faulty publications slip through the cracks and over time it becomes more abundantly clear how it doesn't fit with the observations being made; and vice-versa. Science takes time especially since there's fewer...

What matters in science isn't a scientist's opinions, only the results of their research. The media may give you the other impression but that is not how science functions.

Bias does exist. But confronting those biases are welcomed provided they have sound basis. Science is a refinement process. Every scientific theory has been challenged multiple times over. If it required agreement, scientific progress wouldn't even happen.

Citation needed. Peer review has absolutely nothing to do with opinions or beliefs. Science has nothing to do with either at all. Ideas, speculations and the like are simply not valued at any point. Science is about testing those ideas. Anything without proper basis is what gets thrown out...

As tiny has pointed out that is contradictory. Drifter also said truth is subjective. Unfortunately, the issue with that is it doesn't make any sense. The scientific method completely goes out the window in a world of subjective truth. Without objective truth reality can't be reliably measured...

Ahkay

Is this just postmodernism?

Ope, beat me to it