[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 202 KB, 672x1260, 1481508783491s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8534418 No.8534418 [Reply] [Original]

What is pier review? And what does that have to do with science?

>> No.8534828

>>8534418
I think you meant peer review spaz

>> No.8534898

>>8534418
Pier review is the science of categorizing and analyzing piers. The different styles of piers, their attributes, rates of decay, etc. It is one of the most well respected sciences which is why pier review journals dominate the publishing landscape.

>> No.8534927

My city has a great pier. Tons of sea lions, a boardwalk, and even a roller coaster. If you don't think those have anything to do with science, you've never scienced.

>> No.8534945

>>8534418
A pier review is when a group of scientists gather to review someone's papers for publishing. The term pier review came about when foreign scientists arrived by boat at the pier to review with the local scientists and for convenience did it at the pier. Nowadays a true pier review is done on ceremonial occasions for especially important papers.

If they go to a bar to review its called a beer review.

>> No.8534971

Theres no snow in Saudi Arabia this year, its just not that cold.

>> No.8535009

>>8534945

However extremely important papers which need to be rushed to publication (such as high impact letters) will be reviewed immediately, in what is known as a here review.

>> No.8535112

>>8534898
>>8534945
>>8535009
Thanks for the serious answers, I revere you brainiac people.

>>8534828
Who's the spaz now? Bitch.

>> No.8535130

>>8534418
>OP picture
>We'd like it a little colder
>Canada
>No thanks

>> No.8535144

>>8534418
pier review is a branch of civil engineering that only focuses on rating piers from 1 to 10

>> No.8535289

>>8535009
Sometimes a paper will be reviewed pressed right up against the original author or authors, in what's known as a near review.

>> No.8535300

>>8534898
>>8534927
>>8534945
>>8535009
>>8535144
>>8535289

OP here. Would pear reviews be theoretically possible as well?

>> No.8535331

>>8535112
Are you the same brainlet that started the climate change thread?

>> No.8535341

>>8535300
I'd guess that's kind of the point of such things as the FDA and such, though they probably just check for market quality/safety, could be pear enthusiasts like wine tasters perhaps somewhere in the world.

>> No.8535347

>When your all peers are liberal retards and think global warming exists and/or is man made

>> No.8535769

>>8535347
Prove it. Seriously.

>> No.8535916
File: 34 KB, 516x777, ^21A5B56B68FCABA1DE2117B6A60E6D82DB652B9D2BCAD1095F^pimgpsh_fullsize_distr.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8535916

>>8535300
yes of course

>> No.8535963

>>8535112
>Wants to have a serious discussion on peer review
>Spells it wrong
>Why does noone take me serious :((((
Really makes you think

>> No.8536040

>>8535963
We're having a serious discussion about piers and pears, brainlet

>> No.8536043

>>8535963
are you on the spectrum? srs question

>> No.8536510

>>8535112
>Thanks for the serious answers, I revere you brainiac people.
How did you think anyone would be able to resist? We are just grateful we never got a rejection from pier review.

Wiki has something about it. Briefly: unpaid, anonymous reviews by the peers of the authors. There is "prestige" and a whole lot of work. Just no money. Like in research generally.

That is why we all would like our own piers.