Peer review articles

The purpose of ID’s budding research program is thus to engage open-minded scientists and thoughtful laypersons with credible, persuasive, peer-reviewed, empirical data supporting intelligent design. And this is happening. ID has already gained the kind of scientific recognition you would expect from a young (and vastly underfunded) but promising scientific field. The scientific progress of ID has won the serious attention of skeptics in the scientific community, who engage in scientific debate with ID and attend private scientific conferences allowing off-the-record discussion with ID proponents.

The secret is to establish one of these rings in a way that isn’t so easily detected.
Next time you go to a conference, tell the plenary speaker/honcho/academy member that you were the “nice” reviewer on the paper they recently submitted to Cell/Science/Nature/PNAS. (If they ask you which manuscript it was, just say that it wouldn’t be ethical to discuss specifics.) Say that you admire their work and would always recommend acceptance. Make sure they remember your name. Then, whenever you submit a paper, suggest them as a reviewer – the journal editors will be impressed, as they are ‘leaders in the field’. If Cell/Science/Nature/PNAS subsequently asks you to review a paper from the honcho’s lab, you can accept it without even having to read it! If the paper is published, congratulate the honcho at the next international meeting. If it’s rejected (by the other reviewers) then commiserate with them.
Soon you will belong to a group of sympathetic reviewers who scratch each others’ backs. You’ll be publishing in the big journals yourself now, because you get glowing reviews from the other leaders in the field. You’ll soon be invited to write reviews, give plenary talks, and join the editorial boards of the prestigious journals yourself.

Peer review articles

peer review articles


peer review articlespeer review articlespeer review articlespeer review articles