One of the greatest flaws of the concept of peer review is reputation. If you have a reputation for doing something well enough, some might be tempted to ignore flaws or accept things based purely on that.

Anonymity allows you to posit anything and only be judged on the content of your statement. Science isn’t for personal gain, there are other businesses more suited for that.

Of course, currently 4chan is mainly used for porn and other things relating to the lowest common denominators available – but imagine an anonymous scientific community?

Sure a undergrad student might not know as much as a seasoned researcher, but if two such individuals were allowed to communicate, without knowing each others backgrounds other than they both have a shared interest for a certain field of science – thats where the magic happens. As a grad student I see my professors bounce ideas back and forth with their students all the time. Some really good ideas and theories can come from that.