Science publications:whithering and rejections-cycle continues ad libitum:(

I wonder how some people publish so rapidly,even such fist-clenchingly low grade material?

Studies lacking foundation,even silly grammatical mistakes.While in my case,One of my manuscripts got rejected  because the methodology was too straight forward..

I mean come on?Is this really a reason for rejection?

Science meant to be practical and methodolgy should be repeatable.

Shouldn't it be?

How can others repeat if they don't understand? If the work is not presented in a clear-cut straightforward manner?

This peer review is stellar and insightful—there are peer reviewers too harsh,quixotic or tooooo demanding while others maybe total idiots. 

More fundamentally, peer review is inherently limited, most journals send work to such reviewers who are not experts of that field like this reviewer wrote in my intro section that He/She isn't familiar with the field,so doesn't know and it is shallow;just because he didn't know about it while when I showed it to my colleague,she said it's too long,should be abridged so I shortened it:(

I hate this rejection but but the system has worked in this manner for for 350 years I hear,it will work on for other 350 years I guess:/ After that I think, there maynot be any need of research:P 

This planet may cease to exist by that time:|