Sometimes peer review isn't a good thing, especially if there is an agenda. I personally enjoy seeing someone enter the fray and debunk and argue against something. If it is based on fact, it will stand up to scrutiny. Just arguing against something is not a bad thing.
For example, speaking of peer review, in this situation I was not entirely welcome at the conversation. I was clearly not in the peer group.
I sat on a planning commission for 8 years. We spent many long years master planning a region, and went into great detail when it came down to how much traffic the community was willing to accept in order to gain new housing to support the retail services that were severely lacking in the community. We designed our roads to achieve a level of service "C" at peak hours, which essentially meant you sat at a light, but you cleared it during the cycle and didn't sit through multiple light changes. That is a level that was desired and built out.
Some years later, a new council and new developers came through, and thought they wanted to open up more development in the southern most portion of town. With a maximum build out of 80k people, this effort was going to place an additional 10-12k people in an area that had a single north/south artery. Their state of the art computer model showed that there would be absolutely no impact on the roadways. Yayy and the angels sang and the people were blessed and the council was so happy that they could now build more and more. One small problem, there isn't a chance in hell that the roads could handle that. But, wait, says the mayor, the model proves it!
Now, I love a good computer game as much as the next guy, so I asked at the meeting if I could play with the model
The engineer was happy to show it to me, as it was so flawless and precise that it could manage the data down to a single vehicle, it wasn't just some generic model that did averages and such. Oh and I was so impressed I just had to have him show us more, what a wonderful gadget. I asked, it can't be possible to modify a single vehicles action, can it truly be so? Yes oh Yes ye of little faith, watch. And behold, he slowed a car down and the cars around him slowed, changed lanes, and carried on with their little pixel lives. He was smiling, see how clever? I agreed, Brilliant says I, you really have mastered the art of traffic models. There can be no doubt that this perfectly simulates the traffic conditions, and the council was so happy that this thorn in their side actually "got it". But, I'm sorry, I just have one silly question, and I know I am not a computer scientist or an engineer, I'm just some guy who builds things. Question, I see all of the cars going up and down the streets, and then it appears like they kind of, well, disappear when they go up the on ramps to the freeways. Umm, just out of curiosity, since the surface streets kind of have to interact with the freeway on ramps, what happens if you add traffic to the freeways? Oh, well, that was unfortunate. Oops, forgot to model any traffic on the freeway. So Mr. Code added the freeway traffic at peak hours. 65mph, Sacramento CA I-5 and I-80. Hmmmm....models starting to hork up a hairball or two, seems the traffic going up onto the freeways are clogging up a bit, backing up into the surface streets. Woops, looks like it's getting a bit shakey down south a few miles.
Oh, one more really sorta stupid question for Mr. Code here. Umm, I don't know where you live actually, but at 5pm at peak rush hour, I-5 and I-80 don't actually go 65mph, they are actually locked up and more often than not are at a standstill, but just for kicks, how about we do this. One car you say? You can manipulate a single car, so how about we put one 85 year old lady in the fast lane, and let's say she's doing 50mph. Plug that in. 10 minutes later the traffic model collapsed.
If you have a room full of people who want the model to perform a certain way, you will get the model to perform. If you do not question the data going in, you cannot be sure of the results, you cannot believe anything anyone "proves" simply because they are "educated" and are saying what you want them to say. If you don't question the results, force it to stand up to scrutiny, you are not solving a thing. There is nothing wrong with the current, or any agenda being questioned. It is not offensive to question. A good plan, a proven concept, a strong argument will enjoy and even encourage you to test it, they won't hide from it or cry foul when the model is distrusted. If you want to see how truly someone is committed to an idea, challenge it.
Oh, by the way, that entire development did not occur, when a far "smarter" group of planners, elected officials and developers wanted it. One stupid question.
