all 7 comments

[–]ZephirAWT[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 — a new record Government funding of science has destroyed "peer review" which is now just rubber-stamping "pal review." This is a major problem in climate, environmental and public health research. Most journals are really a joke, publishing incredible amounts of trash and fraud. Papers are pubbed after bogus peer review for the purpose of advancing the government funding agency's agenda. The researchers and reviewers are usually-to-always cronies.

Nowhere in human history science consumed so many resources in both absolute, both relative numbers. Despite of this, Fleming's discovery of penicillin couldn't get published today, for example. That's a huge problem. A fish rots from the head down - and science is supposed to be head of innovation: it avoids utilitarian research at all cost - and this cost is not small. See also:

[–]ZephirAWT[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Has progress in science and technology come to a halt? and Boffins fear we might be running out of ideas.

In a paper published Monday through the National Bureau of Economic Research, "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?", economics professors Nicholas Bloom, Charles Jones, and John Van Reenen, and PhD candidate Michael Webb, defy Betteridge's Law of Headlines by concluding that an idea drought has indeed taken hold. But IMO the problem is actually somewhere else, because too many ideas and findings are simply ignored, denied and - classified.

[–]zyxzevn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You may see more examples on /s/CorruptScience

How many of those were "retracted" because they revealed the problems of Big Pharma?

Most science publications have published commercials or propaganda instead of science.
And peer reviewing becomes censorship when money, reputation or politics is involved.
I also see a lot of circular reasoning, preventing new insights.

Because most scientists are stuck into a paradigm, they can only add a minimal share to this paradigm.
And to stick out they have to exaggerate or even fraud their results.
And many will be tempted to make up a whole paper with copying something or generating something via AI.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

but muh trust the science!

[–]ZephirAWT[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Critical Social Justice Subverts Scientific Publishing

The politicization of science – the infusion of ideology into the scientific enterprise – threatens the ability of science to serve humanity. Today, the greatest such threat comes from a set of ideological viewpoints collectively referred to as Critical Social Justice (CSJ). This contribution describes how CSJ has detrimentally affected scientific publishing by means of social engineering, censorship, and the suppression of scholarship.

[–]SMCAB 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

$cience is the new worldwide religion. It has snagged everyone from all sides. They didn't even need a crusade.

[–]ZephirAWT[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

AI-generated disproportioned rat genitalia makes its way into peer-reviewed journal Another image showed a rat cell that did not resemble the true structure of a rat cell.

Well, not surprisingly progressive Chinese came with it first..;-) They literally made "study" about structure of cells generated on demand with online Midjourney AI. Scientific cheating + A.I. over-trained on sexual content is reliable recipe for such an outcome.