﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Peer Review Process Cannot Be Agreed Upon By Peers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.uncommondescent.com/science/peer-review-process-cannot-be-agreed-upon-by-peers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.uncommondescent.com/science/peer-review-process-cannot-be-agreed-upon-by-peers/</link>
	<description>Serving The Intelligent Design Community</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:18:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph</title>
		<link>http://www.uncommondescent.com/science/peer-review-process-cannot-be-agreed-upon-by-peers/comment-page-1/#comment-350198</link>
		<dc:creator>Joseph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:48:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncommondescent.com/?p=12348#comment-350198</guid>
		<description>1- Science is blind (there&#039;s that word again) to controversy

2- IMHO the best form of &quot;peer-review&quot; is to get your ideas &lt;i&gt;out there&lt;/i&gt; for a wide audience to scrutinize- as opposed to some select few.

3- We may need more journals...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1- Science is blind (there&#8217;s that word again) to controversy</p>
<p>2- IMHO the best form of &#8220;peer-review&#8221; is to get your ideas <i>out there</i> for a wide audience to scrutinize- as opposed to some select few.</p>
<p>3- We may need more journals&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

