This function is now performed by peer reviewers of scientific journals and granting agencies. Peer review as practiced now, however, poses a serious obstacle to the advance of science.
The journal or granting agency sends the article or research proposal to "experts in the field." These are scientists who earlier may have revolted against prevalent dogma and generally accepted opinion. They became recognized as experts once their own notions (and those of their peers) became recognized as the generally accepted truth. As peer reviewers, these scientists are likely to reject notions that contradict accepted dogmas and statements of others who do not realize that "it is common knowledge that "The situation might be more perilous in granting agencies, where a new idea that can be validated only by a time-consuming series of experiments or observations is likely to be labeled by experts as a nonproductive wild goose chase.
I would ...
