Posted on 05/10/2023 2:52:50 PM PDT by ConservativeInPA
But new tools show promise in tackling growing symptom of academia’s “publish or perish” culture
When neuropsychologist Bernhard Sabel put his new fake-paper detector to work, he was “shocked” by what it found. After screening some 5000 papers, he estimates up to 34% of neuroscience papers published in 2020 were likely made up or plagiarized; in medicine, the figure was 24%. Both numbers, which he and colleagues report in a medRxiv preprint posted on 8 May, are well above levels they calculated for 2010—and far larger than the 2% baseline estimated in a 2022 publishers’ group report.
“It is just too hard to believe” at first, says Sabel of Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg and editor-in-chief of Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience. It’s as if “somebody tells you 30% of what you eat is toxic.”
His findings underscore what was widely suspected: Journals are awash in a rising tide of scientific manuscripts from paper mills—secretive businesses that allow researchers to pad their publication records by paying for fake papers or undeserved authorship. “Paper mills have made a fortune by basically attacking a system that has had no idea how to cope with this stuff,” says Dorothy Bishop, a University of Oxford psychologist who studies fraudulent publishing practices. A 2 May announcement from the publisher Hindawi underlined the threat: It shut down four of its journals it found were “heavily compromised” by articles from paper mills.
(Excerpt) Read more at science.org ...
The corruption of the bond rating agencies was one factor that led to the financial meltdown of 2008.
“ Are all institutions in America corrupt?”
Yes, but this is international.
Ninety Five percent of all “studys” are nothing more than a request to the government for more grant money.
Since Charles Lyell.
Researchers are in the business of securing government grants. Any actual science that happens is purely incidental.
"...a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
"The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
"Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
Source: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/president-dwight-d-eisenhowers-farewell-address
This is a worldwide problem.
It takes time and careful, not very interesting work to make a scientific discovery that is actually solid. But out of sight out of mind and once you are out of mind you get no funding so you might as well be dead.
So you fudge things, maybe just a bit, maybe a lot. This keeps the money flowing and everyone is happy. Unless you are in a hard science where your data may be used to build something that then falls down and kills people.
But in the soft sciences you can push malarkey until the cows come home and mostly no one will notice.
In a bit of research for the sensationalism they had for their view, I ran across 2 sites that stated clearly that this deep ground water HELPS create Magma... Now the ONLY way ANTHING can help create molten rock, is if that substance/whatever is HOTTER than the magma thats present. and knowing enough about super heated steam from water, I deducted BULLS**T across the board!!!!
The same applies for the fake pictures on APOD, the fake Pictures photoshopped, all these sites using sensationalism and grandure are absolutely no different than CNN reporting the news!! js...
Exactly... Just check out all the phony ‘climate change’ papers.
As are fake scientific conclusions!
The majority of these “studies” are fake. Scientist trying to replicate them cannot and those that they can replicate for the most part do not achieve the same results.
Stop giving grants for fake research. Grants tells the scientists what their research has to say so they can receive more grants.
Just wait until the AIs get started.
So the “science” isn’t settled?
A good measure of scientific truth is its infrequency.
Wrote a program to generate fake data after a college class lab went bad, and that was in the 70s. Because trying to redo the lab would have seriously cut into beer time. I suspect the same motivation applies today.
If it is Covid related it is probably higher than 85% fake.
LOL, so true. And the papers reflect what the grant giver wants them to reflect, so the grantee can get another grant. Which is why there was so much Covid misinformation. Money.
There is a private sector, sort of, left. Mostly this is big pharma or big money invested in small pharma. There is little money in honest attempts at research and accordingly very little of it; and a lot of interest in trying to refute it, shut it down or censor it.
Or attempts to justify more government power grabs with scare tactics.
Forty-five years ago, a Nobel Prize winner told us that only 50% of papers were true, and half of the rest had flaws in methodology, statistical analysis, and conclusions.
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.