[pieceofthepuzzle]

Academic science, especially university-based science, is unquestionably broken in so many, many ways. Peer review is often having your friends and people you've networked with reviewing your papers. Editors have a lower bar for things coming from ‘name’ labs, and many times the principle investigators of those labs became ‘names’ because they overstated their results and developed a network of supporters to help them get their stuff in higher profile journals.

It would be, in my opinion, surprising if even 50% of published research was either correct or reproducible.

This is not to say we shouldn't be funding research in this country. It is to say, however, that things need to change, a lot. The global warming elite are a perfect example of how mafia’s form in science.

[JoeFromSidney]

It would be, in my opinion, surprising if even 50% of published research was either correct or reproducible.

At least a third of published papers are never cited by other researchers. That doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong; it means that at best they're trivial or irrelevant. And they may also be wrong. Fortunately, the wrong ones are ignored along with the trivial ones.