People cannot deny this to be true but they can argue about what it means. Those opposed seem to be mostly saying that 1) our papers are actually good & there is no problem, 2) Whataboutism about how other fields have problems too 3) Character & motivational assassinations.
Perhaps you can think of an area of weakness in peer review in physics? If people tested it, would it a reasonable criticism to complain they didn't also address postmodernism in gender studies, replication in social sciences, pressure from corporations in medical science?
-
-
I think if there were an expectation that people cannot investigate problems in their own field without knowing about & also addressing problems in every other field at the same time, it would make it nearly impossible to ever address any problems.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.