Posted By:
mikeNot that those procedures are perfect (errors and dishonesty are possible and missed), academic and medical research is peer reviewed.
The research is performed and submitted for peer review.
The editor drives the process and requests peer opinions (obviously, wrong doing is possible here).
Peer opinions are presented in annonymous reports to the editor (again, agendas and else may kill research findings here)
The editor makes requests to the researcher and makes a decision with respect to publication.
Publication legitimizes the results and the broader community is made aware of new knowledge.
In effect, the researchers validate their results through the editors and their publications.
In our hobbies, there is no parallel. The papers do not present peer reviewed research. Opinions are obtained by financially interested 3rd parties and those opinions are not peer reviewed. Thus the opinions are just opinions, especially when the authenticators refuse to discuss their conclusions.
I do not state that David Bushing is incorrect in his opinion, but his refusal to make public and discuss his procedures and conclusions is troubling from a scientist's perspective.
On a side note, if the experts were not to share their information then they would have an advantage in evaluating potential items for purchase. I'm not a legal expert, but, in my view, once the expert issues an opinion to the owner of an item and allows an opinion to be published to the public, he has a responsibilty to explain his conclusions. Since Robert does not own the bat, Robert might not have the necessary access to obtain answers to his questions. Of Robert did own the bat, would David Bushing be forthright? Since the auction house and prior owners allowed the opinion published, do they owe the public an explanation regarding the opinion, or do they get away with hiding behind the opinion?