Keep in mind, in the world of academia and science, these guys have to "publish or perish." It's dog-eat-dog, every man for himself. To have findings published, your papers must be subject to extensive peer review and believe me, "peer" is a nice way of saying "other guys in your field who are dying to prove you wrong so they can advance." That's what makes science so trustworthy. People can't just say stuff. Or wing a paper and claim a new discovery. It's a bloody battle and people can get nasty. That ensures that any new knowledge added to these journals is refined, accurate and extremely reliable until another better equipped and smarter guy or gal comes along with new data that forces a change in understanding.
(wouldn't it be nice to see this method applied for all articles published by the writing committee at WT?)