[SampleMan]

I gave you the truth free of charge. If you have a problem with it, then address it rationally, not as you have with illogical rubbish.

The problem is the logical rubbish that passes as science. Grant money has created a wasteland in what should be scientific method, and far too often peer review is simply preaching to the group-think choir.

My experience with the science departments at Universities is that they are full of personal politics that affect the judgment of the staff, and the scientific findings (when open to interpretation or variable input) amazingly correspond with the click they're in.

[spunkets]

"Grant money has created a wasteland in what should be scientific method"

this statement doesn't make any sense.

"far too often peer review is simply preaching to the group-think choir."

Peer review simply means someone that understands the material looked it over for originality, completeness of reference, sound logic, supported conclusions and appropriateness for the particular publication. It is never a process that includes "group think".

" My experience with the science departments at Universities"

What are those depts and what is your experience with those science depts?