(April 17, 2023 at 2:29 pm)HappySkeptic Wrote: Peer review is not the same as communication. Peer review means you don't get to share your ideas before your peers have determined that it is likely free from mistakes, and is providing something new. It is largely about the cost of disseminating information, and the reputation of the journal doing the publication.
Science works perfectly fine by validation or falsification by others after publication. It doesn't require a pre-publication gatekeeper.
That's not true at all. Most of the published research is wrong. Passing peer-review means only the paper is not obviously wrong. And my previous paper published in Regionalne Studije contained basically nothing new, the only thing new there was the (basically irrelevant to the topic) speculation that PIE *danu (river) and PAN *danau (lake) were related.