You are right and you are wrong. First, I am a scientist and I do 6-8 peer reviews for various (nonmedical) journals each year. The guidelines for the peer review process vary and depend on the policy of the journal. Some journals give you up to 6 weeks to complete and return your review. You must agree to the the time limit before being given access to the article. However, some high end journals have special expedited reviews for important breaking research. Here, you might be given as little as 2 weeks to submit your review. The overall time from submission to publication to appearance varies in a big way and is not necessarily correlated to the quality of the journal. Some high end journals might take 1.5 years, whereas some decent but lesser journal might hit the online edition in 4 months. Keep in mind that we are in the middle of a transformation in the publication process with the growing influence of completely electronic journals such as PLOSONE.
So, with respect to ACTC. The only way that I can read Rabin's statement is that it has been submitted, accepted, and is scheduled for publication. If they had merely completed the paper, he has made a completely speculative BS misleading statement.
