Questions

Submitted by BillW (United States), Nov 30, 2009 15:04

In a perfect world neither peer-reviewers nor whistle-blowers should be anonymous. In a world where "peer-reviewers" collude with charlatans to exclude valid science from publication, these peer-reviewers need to be known. In a world where "peer-reviewers" collude with charlatans to actively work to destroy the reputations of those who dissent from their orthodoxy, whistle-blowers deserve anonymity. This person has done the world a great service.

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.

Submit a comment on this article

Other reader comments on this item

Title	By	Date
Climate Gate [125 words]	Quinn Woodworth	Dec 1, 2009 14:16
"Heed My Opinion!" vs. "Look At What I Found!" [210 words]	bobby b	Nov 30, 2009 15:41
then whats the point of this site? [60 words]	Fen	Nov 30, 2009
apples and oranges [102 words]	Jeff	Nov 30, 2009
Why is it different? [56 words]	scott	Nov 30, 2009
Tit for tat [57 words]	agesilaus	Nov 30, 2009
Coastal property... [w/response] [24 words]	newscaper	Nov 30, 2009
⇒ Questions [65 words]	BillW	Nov 30, 2009
Whistleblowing is different than stealing or trespassing [108 words]	Independent	Nov 30, 2009
All secrets are not the same [109 words]	Shannon Love	Nov 30, 2009
caution in revolutions [53 words]	Michael Kennedy	Nov 30, 2009

Comment on this item

Subscribe to the Mailing List

Enter your email address:

Follow Us On:

RSS Twitter

Facebook Google Buzz

Newest

Most Viewed

Most Mailed