Posted on 03/07/2014 5:21:18 PM PST by No One Special
I went to the article and another article that was referenced and I didn’t see anything about the specific journals where this occurred.
So should everybody, and that's one reason why God lets it get so damned dark. To make it super obvious that He really is the only answer.
This answers the age-old question of whether the world is run by wise men bluffing or idiots who really mean it.
“Peer reviewed” science and academia is a LIE. Papers are published and certified as “peer reviewed” that have literally never been read by ANYONE, including the editors of the scientific journals.
Really?
Where are these articles? References, please.
I realize that to the layperson, the articles that we scientists write and publish may seem like utter gibberish, but that is only because we are writing in a very technical language that took us years to learn. Like any language, if you don't know scientific jargon, it sounds like nonsense, but that does not mean it is nonsense to those who understand it.
I read peer-reviewed scientific publications every day. I have yet to find one that is nonsense.
You must have missed these:
Fake Research Papers: How Did More Than 120 ‘Gibberish’ Computer-Generated Studies Get Published?
Here’s the article referenced by the KD article she references:
You were probably already aware of this one, but it’s one of the funniest things I’ve ever read.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/transgress_v2/transgress_v2_singlefile.html
The nonsense does not happen in every journal or every science. I have been a reviewer several times and I can assure you that I read each paper.
I will reject incremental papers reporting merely on progress, weak science papers, papers written so the department head will fund a trip to Hawaii (If that’s where the conference is), and papers I simply cannot understand or that don’t seem to be science papers. Papers I can’t understand I’ll usually toss to someone else in case my lack of understanding is rooted in ignorance.
I’ll need to see some examples of nonsense machine-written papers.
Then there is the Turbo Encabulator, which I encourage you all to look up. Also see Journal of Irreproducible Results.
The “paper” I generated was quite obviously fake. For example, one of the trial runs described in the “Dogfooding Papaya” section was “(2) we measured RAM speed as a function of optical drive speed on an Atari 2600.”
Without telling my son that the “paper” was randomly generated, I showed it to him. He skimmed through and pronounced the paper “BS.”
Now he is generating his own “paper.”
Re Sokal affair, from article, “At that time, the journal did not practice academic peer review “
so it’s hardly a failure of peer review.
What I see in the article is that most of those fake papers were conference proceedings. Typically, submissions to conferences have a very low bar to publication.
The article also said that over 120 of these fake conference proceedings were published in five years. That’s a minuscule number compared to the millions of scientific publications every year. It is also a small subset of the 20,000 fraudulent papers estimated to be published every year.
Nah. But it was very funny.
Isn't that a problem in itself?
Oh yes indeed! The whole “gibberish paper” issue seems to be a joke played on the “establishment”.
“millions of scientific publications every year.
Isn’t that a problem in itself?”
What, that there are millions of scientific pubs, and perhaps 20,000 fraudulent ones?
Hardly cause for concern because most get caught later when nobody can replicate the results.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.