Page 24 - Elana Freeland - Under an Ionized Sky

It should therefore not be surprising to learn that the peer review system has been co-opted to
banish those theories and scientists who don’t “play ball” to the outer darkness of non-
publication, stonewalled careers, and worse. Nobel Laureate biologist Sydney Brenner:

I think peer review is hindering science. In fact, I think it has become a completely corrupt system. It’s corrupt in
many ways, in that scientists and academics have handed over to the editors of these journals the ability to make
judgment on science and scientists. There are universities in America, and I’ve heard from many committees, that
won’t consider people’s publications in low impact factor journals. . .it puts the judgment in the hands of people who
really have no reason to exercise judgment at all. And that’s all been done in the aid of commerce, because they are
39
now giant organizations making money out of it.

“Powerful orthodoxy against a marginalized heterodoxy” is how Charles Eisenstein describes
the opposition to cutting-edge Electric Universe scientists:

If you have faith in the soundness of our scientific institutions, you will assume that the dissidents are marginalized
for very good reason: their work is substandard. If you believe that the peer review process is fair and open, then the
dearth of peer-reviewed citations for [Electric Universe] research is a damning indictment of their theory. And if you
believe that the corpus of mainstream physics is fundamentally correct, and that science is progressing closer and
closer to truth, you will be highly skeptical of any major departure from standard theories. . .Can we trust scientific
consensus? Can we trust the integrity of our scientific institutions? Perhaps not. Over the last few years, a growing
chorus of insider critics have been exposing serious flaws in the ways that scientific research is funded and published,
40
leading some to go so far as to say, “Science is broken.”

Between 1973 and 2013, six major publishers decided which scientific papers merited
publication and which didn’t (ACS; Reed Elsevier; Sage; Taylor & Francis; Springer; and Wiley-
Blackwell). All were in the back pocket of Big Pharma and the medical industry, which, like the
CIA, NASA, EPA, etc., are not what they seem:

“As long as publishing in high impact factor journals is a requirement for researchers to obtain positions, research
funding, and recognition from peers, the major commercial publishers will maintain their hold on the academic
publishing system,” added [Professor Vincent Lariviere, lead author of the study from the University of Montreal’s
School of Library and Information Science]. 41

The danger quotient for scientists working on classified projects is greater than just being
stripped of their career and livelihood. In the early days of the “Star Wars” Strategic Defense
Initiative (SDI) now culminating in the Space Fence, two dozen scientists and experts working
for Marconi and Plessey Defence Systems either disappeared or died under “mysterious
circumstances.” Most were microbiologists. The scientist death toll continued into the 1990s and
42
post-9/11. Now, the targets appear to be naturopathic doctors and health-minded MDs peering
behind the curtains of Big Pharma vaccinations, autism, and cancer-for-profit. 43

NEXT STOP: THE SSS SPACE FENCE

We are a long way from President Kennedy’s Space Age dreams and resolution to put an end to
chemical polluters and the destruction of soil and biodiversity. Former U.S. Secretary of Defense
Ashton B. Carter had a doctorate in physics from Oxford University, and with the stroke of a
presidential pen on Thanksgiving 2015, the U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness
Act (HR2262) a.k.a. Space Act of 2015 thumbed its nose at the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 and
erased whatever fleeting separation was left between the militarizing of space and corporations