Peers don't vote on facts asnd logic unless it is proposed by other Peers.
Conspiracy theory.
Peer Review are used to use to examine prospective hypotheses, and evidences and data supplied, not the scientists themselves.
If there are no errors, no doctoring data and figures, and if the test results back positively back up the hypothesis, then the hypothesis is probable, but if the evidence/test results/data don’t back up (negative results), then the hypothesis isn’t probable (and therefore debunked).
Second, when people talk of Peer Review, the Peer Review are usually focused around the branches and their fields and sub-fields of Natural Science.
Egyptology is not Natural Science, nor are archaeology, anthropology and philology. These all fall under Social Science, not under Natural Science.
Social Science concerns more about human behaviors, human cultures and human activities and achievements, hence Social Science isn’t hard science.
And since areas like archaeology and anthropology aren’t hard science, Social Science don’t actually follow the same requirements of Falsifiability, Scientific Method and Peer Review in the ways branches and fields in Natural Science do.
Although the fields of studies in Social Science follow some guidelines, rules and requirements that are similar to that of Life Science and Physical Science, the ways humans behave, think and act, leave a large wiggle rooms for exceptions to occur, because not every humans think, behave or act in the same ways as everyone else.
For instance, if anyone study ancient cultures in anthropology, you would know that there are many cultures that have different ways of life and how they go about doing them.
Like in the Old World, many cultures have religions that practice blood sacrifices in their religions, but these most involved sacrifices of animals, generally not human sacrifices. But in pre-Colombian cultures of the Mesoamerica and Southern America, human sacrifices were not considered moral, they were legal too.