Refereed Journals: Do They Insure Quality or Enforce Orthodoxy?

Author: Frank J. Tipler, Professor of Mathematical Physics - Tulane University in New Orleans

This article is straightforward; simple to understand yet powerful in its message. Examining the peer-review process for academic journals, he points out that, rather than simply weeding out bogus articles, they serve much more effectively to stunt the advance of knowledge and enforce conformity to accepted theories.

He shows that a staggeringly large number of nobel prize winners all had several rejected articles from the peer-review process, even though their ideas were later given widespread credit and acceptance.

This article is valuable as an indication of the serious problems in the peer-review process. This, of course, is valid for any discipline and the many branches of science that conform to some form of Darwinism are no exception. Not only does the scientific establishment defend Darwinism far beyond empirical justification, the peer-review process guarantees that any other opinions or criticisms will not be given a fair hearing or publication. Science is as far from being objective as can be imagined.