I Have Been "Peer Reviewed"

As readers of this blog know, I have been making fun of the "scholars" for quite some time for their concept of "peer review". In fact I think the term has been bastardized completely beyond recognition. Unfortunately no mocking comment that I can make can out do what they say say themselves. I noticed this bit on 911 Blogger, posted by Jon Gold regarding some letters posted on the "Journal" website, including my recent exchange with Dr. Jones:

Four peer-reviewed Letters were recently added to the Journal of 9/11 Studies. We invite reader comments on these papers which add to the body of evidence supporting the controlled demolition of the WTC buildings and raise significant questions regarding "whodunnit". We appreciate the rapid rate of contributions of fine papers to the Journal of 9/11 Studies.

Of course, there is nothing peer reviewed about a letter at all, it is merely expressing your feedback and opinion on an issue. I did not have a single person "review" my letter, not even Pat, but I guess it is now considered "peer reviewed" by nature of having been argued against by Steven Jones. I seriously doubt any of the other 3 letters went through a review process either. The silly thing is, as Jon Gold indicates in the comments. This term was not created by him, but by Jones himself:

"The above paragraph... Was sent to me by Steven Jones. If you have a problem with the wording, feel free to contact him. I posted it because he sent it to me."

Unbelievable. I wonder if I can put this in my C.V.