Social ‘scientist’ have always falsified data. With the anthropogenic global warming religion we have massive falsification of data in the ‘hard’ sciences.
No ‘peers’ are going to defy the new religious orthodoxy masquerading as science. Their careers, even their lives, are at stake.
Follow the money. Hoaxes have an unfortunate but common history in science (Piltdown man lasted about 30 years). Eventually the facts will out but it can be expensive in lives and money in the mean time. Universities, in their lust for grants, are as bad as anyone.
This has been well known but largely ignored. John Ioannidis has been exploring the issue for over a decade. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._A._Ioannidis
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/12/13/the-truth-wears-off
The Truth Wears Off
Is there something wrong with the scientific method?
Snip...
The problem of selective reporting is rooted in a fundamental cognitive flaw, which is that we like proving ourselves right and hate being wrong. It feels good to validate a hypothesis, Ioannidis said. It feels even better when youve got a financial interest in the idea or your career depends upon it. And thats why, even after a claim has been systematically disprovenhe cites, for instance, the early work on hormone replacement therapy, or claims involving various vitaminsyou still see some stubborn researchers citing the first few studies that show a strong effect. They really want to believe that its true.
/snip
Because the New Left lacked cohesion it fell apart as a political movement. However, its revolutionaries reorganized themselves into a multitude of single issue groups. Thus we now have for example, radical feminists, black extremists, anti-war peace’ activists, animal rights groups, radical environmentalists, and gay’ rights groups.
....
In 1923, the Frankfurt School-a Marxist think-tank-was founded in Weimar Germany. Among its founders were Georg Lukacs, Herbert Marcuse, and Theodor Adorno. The school was a multidisciplinary effort which included sociologists, sexologists, and psychologists.
The primary goal of the Frankfurt School was to translate Marxism from economic terms into cultural terms. It would provide the ideas on which to base a new political theory of revoltuion based on culture, harnessing new oppressed groups for the faithless proletariat. Smashing religion, morals, It would also build a constituency among academics, who could build careers studying and writing about the new oppression.
...
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/cultural_marxism.html
If the “science” supports an anti-Christian agenda or implies that the federal government needs to intervene in the economy, then it’s probably pseudoscience. That’s a pretty useful tactic for people who want to recognize pseudoscience, but just don’t have time to learn all the principles and jargon necessary to do so. Another useful tactic can be to read the Bible, which for 2000 years has managed to keep a 100% track record on historical and scientific matters.
“Peer review” means nothing when all the “peers” have the same goal of leeching off of taxpayer dollars. Thus, alarmism and inconclusive gibberish rule the day with the National Academy of Sciences and other institutions which don’t care to apply their science. Useful and factual science is done by applying it (i.e. engineers and doctors), the very people the Leftists hate.
A good summary from the Economist last year is here:
http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21588057-scientists-think-science-self-correcting-alarming-degree-it-not-trouble
Peer review is all about “consensus” now instead of “verifiability, reproducibility, and honesty.”
If anyone tries to publish something contrary to the accepted dogma, they shriek as if someone molested the statue of the goddess in the temple.
Especially if it is contrary to the Global Warming religion.
So much science isn’t science.
And if you display a skeptical attitude to the “science”. they call you anti-science.
HINT: People who actually care about science are always skeptical. The people who take the “science” on faith and get upset when the dogma is questioned, are not actually scientists.
Eugenics was one huge fraudulent science, supported by the top names in “evolutionary biology”. It was taught in schools as fact, there were journals devoted to it, academic societies, etc. The scientific merits of eugenics lie somewhere between palmstry and wiccan magick.
I’m like, almost totally shocked. I suspect somewhere in the process is a single enabling point but it’s just a hunch. Gotta wonder just who the gatekeepers are for dog and pony science. </conspiracy>