Peer Review Revisited

Earlier, I discussed some of the difficulties of peer review and how much I dislike it when people try to invoke a conspiracy to explain why their paper wasn't accepted. This particularly happens among Creationists and ID proponents. This last week, I read an article in Discover that talked about Mordahai Milgrom, who has proposed a rather controversial reformulation of gravity. His proposal would totally alter our concept of gravity and cosmology. Of course he has had trouble publishing his ideas, but through effort and research and several tries, he was able to finally get all of his original papers published in The Astrophysical Journal. At this point, it is too soon to tell if his ideas will gain wide acceptance.

I would have more respect for the Discovery Institute, if they followed this path of doing research and attempting to publish it. However they have chosen to try to have their ideas included by launching a PR offensive. This is not how science is done (if you consider ID science.)