Post ASTa4RIoqpcAMm2aBM by siobhansarelle@mastodon.lol
 (DIR) More posts by siobhansarelle@mastodon.lol
 (DIR) Post #ASRg3rHiyUv44IiO7k by RobExmoor@toot.community
       2023-02-07T19:10:03Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @science_quotes you cannot take peer review out of science. It simply is not science if it’s not peer reviewed.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASRjHygsXM3wxAuAM4 by vy@sciencemastodon.com
       2023-02-07T19:46:12Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @science_quotes yes
       
 (DIR) Post #ASRktNqu371nexzh7Q by Naich@fosstodon.org
       2023-02-07T20:04:11Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @science_quotes It's not perfect but any means but there needs to be a robust procedure in place too vet papers, especially now we have AI quite capable of churning out plausible rubbish.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASS84fMvYrqE7LK2F6 by mike@sauropods.win
       2023-02-08T00:23:57Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @science_quotes "Impediment", surely?
       
 (DIR) Post #ASTX3pQvLfPF3QqgUq by julesbl@mastodon.me.uk
       2023-02-08T16:38:37Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @science_quotesThe problem seems to be with the publish or die culture. Too many scientists publishing badly thought out and implemented papers just to keep on the bandwagon and get tenure.The people doing the verification get buried in half basked papers.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASTXKfDuYtK8JOn29o by admadlad@twit.social
       2023-02-08T16:41:40Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @science_quotes wow. Just wow. I’m no scientist, but I know for a fact that peer review is the foundation of scientific enquiry. It’s the whole basis of verification and validation of replicable results. It’s what makes science…science, else anybody would claim anything, like ‘the earth is flat’ or that ‘dihydrogen monoxide’ is lethal🤣
       
 (DIR) Post #ASTXfJmZTRbNtYqmtE by siobhansarelle@mastodon.lol
       2023-02-08T16:45:24Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @science_quotes On the basis that you have asked about scientific *progress* and that progress can be made in understanding science without it being peer reviewed, my answer is that it depends on context.If the methods are scientific, then the presence of data pertaining to whatever is being studied, is valid, and potentially useful regardless of its accuracy, even just to eliminate possibilities. This I think amounts to progress on some level.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASTYKJXZHK0r19NhQG by siobhansarelle@mastodon.lol
       2023-02-08T16:52:48Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @science_quotes I which case, I wonder if the basis of your poll is not really to determine if peer reviews are critical to scientific progress but there is a problem to solve or a decision to be made and that an option or options you have may not be peer reviewed.It may be that the non peer reviewed options could achieve the result you need and could be as valid as the peer reviewed ones.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASTa4RIoqpcAMm2aBM by siobhansarelle@mastodon.lol
       2023-02-08T16:46:51Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @science_quotes It could be that an initial study of something is not peer reviewed but brings forth data that can be used for further study that can be peer reviewed. Therefore the initial study could be considered as scientific progress.