On the S991T site are three papers that are described as having been “peer reviewed.” I would like to discuss this process with you if I may.
Before I begin, I would like to establish a baseline definition of the term Peer Review. For that purpose, I would like to refer to the Wikipedia
article ”Peer Review.”
The problem for S911T, as I see it, is that the 911 issues tend to cover a wide range of disciplines, from structural engineering, to political
science to pilot training, to name a few. Thus, unless an article or paper is narrowly focused on a singe issue, it can span many of these subject
This, quite obviously, creates a problem is a paper is to be peer reviewed. Namely, how is the appropriate peer to be chosen?
For instance, do we define the peers to be anyone involved in the “911 truth” movement, or S911T, regardless of their level or area of expertise?
Technically this may be the most accurate method of adhering to the standard definition of “peer review.” In other words, the only criterion to
be a peer is to be a member of S911T.
While this may technically satisfy the standard definition of a peer, it is altogether insufficient. In a practical sense, this would wash out the
qualifications to the point where it would make a mockery of the term peer review.
Furthermore, under this interpretation, any secondary areas of expertise would be moot. For instance, a reviewer’s academic qualifications would be
immaterial and of no importance to the issues.
Obviously this is an unacceptable interpretation of what constitutes a peer.
Therefore to give the peer reviews process any meaningful value, it is essential that the peers be chosen for their expertise in the subject matter at
For instance, if a professor in medieval art were to write a paper that covers the subjects of microbiology and astrophysics, who should review it?
Should it be a dentist, another art historian, or experts in microbiology and astrophysics?
What are the criteria for selecting a “peer” to review a paper? In particular, if a paper covers a range of disciplines, how to you choose who
will review it?
Now the traditional processes for a print based journal may not be totally appropriate for S911T, I can accept that. However, if S911T is going to
promote certain papers on its web site as being peer reviewed, then you need to have some sort of policies, procedures and standards for the peer
For instance a couple of valid questions might be:
”Is the author qualified to make the claims being made?”
Or “Does the conclusion follow logically from the data?”
What are the procedures and standards used in the peer review process once the appropriate reviewers have been chosen?
[edit on 3-7-2006 by HowardRoark]