RE: RE: Trying to mock the dead, back to life...An urgent message.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Trying to mock the dead, back to life...An urgent message.

Words
334
Reading
2 min
Listen
Play
6y

What has that got to do with scientists? Or do you think they don't exist. Or that they run the world.

Scientists compete with each other for funding within their fields, from the funding sources, which as you point out, are criminals. This, as you know, impacts their funding a lot. But, peer review is those competitors within a field of study submitting their work to each other to be checked for accuracy and factual basis before being published.

This is useful to the criminals funding this work (but far more relevant to us, because we can have confidence that peers are ruthless in criticizing their competitors) because they want actual results for their investments, as well as occasional PR. Peer review tends to be brutally honest, as the criminal and tortuous legal actions against Michael Mann reveal, who created the famous hockey stick global temperature graph by cherry-picking and stacking data, but has been called out by the community - despite the PR purpose of the funding from the criminals.

Imagine how different the enemedia would be if NY Slimes had to let Buttfeed, Breitbart, and the Gray Lady approve of their stories before they could be published? Both industries are fed from the same trough, even if advertising and grant monies are apparently different sources, they are simply different vectors for the same forces to effect influence. The banksters are strongly motivated to allow peer review to work as effectively as possible, even if that causes their PR funding to be attacked by that system, and this mechanism is completely public, allowing the process to inform those attentive of the facts regarding research as soon as it's available.

I have previously published extensive review of bodies of research, regarding the Younger Dryas and papers discussing the impact theory(s). It's actually a fascinating process, and demonstrably decentralized. It's you who reads the papers published and ascertains the factual basis and relative significance of the data and conclusions of the papers and their rebuttals.

@valued-customer: What has that | Ecency