I posted this study because it highlights flaws in peer review that some people think is the gold standard and was hoping the discussion would be in the lines of how, why and what could be done to make peer review better.
As it turns out it seems people felt it was an attack on science and attacked the study(reminded me of how some religious folk attack science that shows their religion flawed or wrong).
In my opinion Peer review isn't part of the scientific method(process) which validates through testing, experimenting, observing, etc.
Peer review is simply used to publish papers. Others peers read the study and either agree with it, disagree with it or parts of it. The peers don't go do all the research, experiments and tests again.