Neil Godfrey posted about peer-reviewed journals and how the peer review process is imperfect, if not indeed deeply flawed, and thus even problematic studies manage to get through into peer-reviewed journals in the sciences. And if that is true in the sciences, surely it is also true in the domain of history.
And so what does that tell us? That most mythicist writings are so very bad, so obviously flawed, so profoundly bizarre, that they cannot make it past even a deeply flawed quality control process.
I’m so glad Neil Godfrey took the time to highlight this.