peer review system substantiate complaints about this

[Yuri Tambovtsev]

Dear Funknet colleagues, may be, it is not only I, who is not satisfied with the resilts of Peer Review. If what I received through the INternet is correct, then 92% of scholars are not satisfied either. Hope it is not somebody's joke. This is what I received:
"As you know, only 8% members of the Scientific Research Society agreed that 'peer review works well as it is.' (Chubin and Hackett, 1990; p.192)
 "A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision and an analysis of the peer review system substantiate complaints about this fundamental aspect of scientific research." (Horrobin, 2001)
 
Horrobin concludes that peer review "is a non-validated charade whose processes generate results little better than does chance." (Horrobin, 2001) This has been statistically proven and reported by an increasing number of journal editors.
 But, "Peer Review is one of the sacred pillars of the scientific edifice" (Goodstein, 2000), it is a necessary condition in quality assurance for Scientific/Engineering publications, and "Peer Review is central to the organization of modern science.why not apply scientific [and engineering] methods to the peer review process" (Horrobin, 2001)." What is your own opinion? Be well, Yuri Tambovtsev