There are many on this board, even some claiming scientific credentials, that seem to equate faceless blogs with peer reviewed articles. While I can understand that being the case for some of the less than stellar IQs on this board, I can only surmise the reason for those that seem to have a modicum of intelligence. Peer review vs commercials and spam Why is that? And what exactly is peer review? The concept of peer review is about 300 years old and is the cornerstone of modern science. The best analogy for peer review is that it acts as a spam filter: rubbish ideas are kept from being published so that other scientists dont waste their time reading spam. Only ideas that are not obviously rubbish make it into the literature, and once in the literature, the scientific marketplace of ideas determines their ultimate fate. Lets examine how different this process is from just posting ones ideas on some web page.