Comment by digi_owl
9 years ago
The basic issue is that reviews are just looking for glaring problems in the presentation. To really test an article one has to replicate the experiment from the ground up. And these days thats damn hard and expensive to do.
For the typical reviewer, replication is probably downright impossible.
http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-...
The real issue is the reliance on authority rather than actual evaluation of the merits of the papers by everyone.