not quite right.
science comes from curiosity. peer review is one way to channel curiosity, or to thwart it for that matter.
check out the curiosity in the global warming advocates.
And here is Mann's response:
"Re, your point at the end--you've taken the words out of my mouth. Skepticism is essential for the functioning of science. It yields an erratic path towards eventual truth. But legitimate scientific skepticism is exercised through formal scientific circles, in particular the peer review process. A necessary though not in general sufficient condition for taking a scientific criticism seriously is that it has passed through the legitimate scientific peer review process. those such as McIntyre who operate almost entirely outside of this system are not to be trusted."
In principle, Revkin and Mann are quite right.
``I must give him his due. He has considerably cretinized me.'' Lautréamont
Pics click to enlarge.
