- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 42,744
- Reaction score
- 22,569
- Location
- Bonners Ferry ID USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Legislation and regulation are not the same thing, in this case or any other. Similar in nature, yes, but they are two different things.
In the legal world they can both send you to prison. So I would have to say that they are the same for all intents and purposes as the end result is exactly the same.
As far as the three things you've listed, you haven't proven yourself right, it's not up to us to prove you wrong. You made some assumptions about the peer-review process that you've yet to support. You don't know why something might be granted a waiver, you just assumed they do it on spurious grounds. Potential incentive to possibly maybe be biased on peer-review does not mean biased peer review occurred. After all, you have a direct financial incentive to cheat on your taxes, but that could hardly be considered evidence that you've actually done it, right?
So you see absolutely nothing wrong with them? That a government agency doesn't enforce proper peer review standards on things that they use to affect things on a national level?
That a government agency can waive though a paper that has not been peer reviewed without peer reviewing it? Only reason for such a policy that I can think is that they don't want people to know the proper facts. Which means that they will/can waive something through the process in order to further their own ends no matter what. Can you think of another logical proper reason?
That a government agency peer reviews it's own papers..in direct contradiction to what a peer review is suppose to be?
If I have to explain to you why those are wrong then I'm afraid you just would not understand. Perhaps Catawba can give it a try?
Last edited: