Suppose you write a blog post arguing a point. Some readers will reply (or, worse, think it without saying it): “If that was true, you would get it published in a peer reviewed journal. If you don’t do that, it’s because you’re wrong.” The assumption here is that peer reviewed journals do very accurate gatekeeping about which ideas are good or bad. The assumption here is that almost all the good ideas get published and few of the bad ones.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://criticalfallibilism.com/peer-review-and-appeals-to-authority/