[dpq]

> I do hope that blogs and comment sections do not end up serving any formal role in the scientific literature.

Why not? It all depends on the qualification of the people writing blog posts and comments. Remember that some 300 years ago a lot of scientific results existed in epistolary form only, and that first journals that looked like today's thing (like the Bulletin of the Royal Society) were basically compilations of letters sent by astronomers, naturalists etc and reactions of their peers sent as follow-up letters.

Naturally, this doesn't mean that anybody and their dog should have a voice in discussing matters like cosmology if they actually have no clue about it.

[onhn]

The continuation of the system you mention still exists today, and is the main channel of scientific discourse. I think it is a better channel to use when challenging someone's work.

(I don't agree with your statement that it depends on qualifications -- I don't think qualification is a measure of the importance of a contribution.)