If information is released and is not externally and independently peer reviewed (as was done with the large constrictor report) then it is not credible and should not be used.

If information is kept until it is peer reviewed then there is a conspiracy to hide the data and keep it from the public.

Doesn't make a difference what they do, they are wrong either way, pretty cool. I think you got 'em.

However, if I were the researchers I would go for peer review as it is the most acceptable way for them to meet their responsibility to provide the information to the public. Especially when an issue is controversial.

If the results are released as they are obtained rather than summarized, synthesized, and interpreted it is news not science.

And I know this has been mentioned before but there is a Scientific Journal Embargo Policy (google the capitalized words) that prevents the release of data prior to publication.

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]