We’ve seen the way that the scientific establishment went after purveyors of entirely scientific doubts about Covid policy, cancelling those it could and censoring those it couldn’t cancel. The venality, dishonesty, and sheer lust for power and control that marked the Covid response – together with a deeply unimpressive record of actually getting the science right themselves – suggests that our science authorities are not to be trusted with policing science fraud, particularly as they’re often purveyors of fraudulent science themselves.
Yet there really is a problem. Science currently faces a “replication crisis.” in which vast numbers of published results don’t hold up when examined. Whole disciplines (*cough* social psychology *cough*) are so riddled with fraud as to be useless. And the public’s faith in science, which the “fraudbusters” of ORI were trying to preserve, has taken an enormous hit as a result.
Well, every successful system accumulates parasites, and American science has been enormously successful. But now it has accumulated a parasitic load that is rendering it weak and sick. So what do we do?
Reynolds list of “suggested solutions” are a great idea.
Do the researchers still keep the tax credits or grants they’ve spent?
Their “positions” at universities, the faculty spiffs…
When will we have the conversation of Burundi covid and jab deaths?
#coldfusion
When the TDSB had to fire their unqualified Education Director, they claimed it was too difficult to recover his wages that were paid to him under false pretenses as a result of his plagiarism.
They would probably claim the same here.
As a general rule, it’s near impossible to recover money paid out to former employees, no matter what the situation. Even a prepaid retention bonus is tough to collect on when the employee leaves early.
Over funded
Stealing that.
Check where the moneys coming from.
Exactly, not only is it over-funded but virtually all of the funding comes from a captured and pseudo-science corrupted and weaponized state through their monopoly guild socialism domesticated “professions”.
FUNDING, I don’t think that word means what you think it does. Scientists are bought and paid for, not funded. And the leftist media is also bought and paid for, and the CUCKservatives are useless cowardly jackA$$’.
“Funding” is one of the activities at a bell ringer’s convention.
Policy Based Evidence Manufacturing.
Any fool who proclaims “I believe The Science TM”,demonstrates their arrogance and ignorance..
Which is the expected qualification for all our Progressive Comrades.
Progressive,like rust.
“Any fool who proclaims “I believe The Science TM”,demonstrates their arrogance and ignorance..
Which is the expected qualification for all our Progressive Comrades.”
Agreed. ClimateGate was the end of all trust in ‘scientists’ for me.
You want my trust back? EARN IT. Engage in open and honest debate with the people who disagree with you.
Stop screaming “Shut Up, DENIER!!!” at them, as if you are afraid of hearing a different opinion. You think they are wrong? PROVE them wrong, then….using the Scientific Method.
(…you *do* remember the Scientific Method, right? The very foundation of what you (supposedly) do?)
Stop taking money to look the other way, and do the jobs you are supposed to be doing. Fairly and honestly.
So what do we do?
We could ask the GIANT RAT-
Naah, I’ll spare you the link. The elephant in the room that certain regular posters keep ignoring is that it doesn’t matter how “peer- reviewed” a study is if the peers are just as corrupt as the author. Or if the peers just refuse to review anything that contradicts the dominant paradigm.
“Naah, I’ll spare you the link. The elephant in the room that certain regular posters keep ignoring is that it doesn’t matter how “peer- reviewed” a study is if the peers are just as corrupt as the author. Or if the peers just refuse to review anything that contradicts the dominant paradigm.”
That’s EXACTLY it, Daniel.
And we all know who those “certain regular posters” are…we just don’t know why they persist so stubbornly in ignoring the obvious facts here. People will say whatever they are *paid* to say, period. Threaten their careers and they will quickly fall in line.
You have little idea how peer review works or what it’s supposed to achieve.
As an example, it’s very common for a potential reviewer to turn down an offer to review a paper, and there’s a hundred reasons for doing so. The paper is not then rejected. The editors simply find someone else.
In fact they expect some turn downs. That’s why, if the editors are looking for three reviewers, they’ll ask five different scientists at the beginning, and add more as needs be.
Here’s an entirely wholesome giant rat for a welcome change:
https://youtu.be/IXHcSBhfkx8?si=a2Lyxe5Je1taow3g
Turns out the “peer reviewers” are as corrupt as the ones submitting the research, an echo chamber of left hand washing the right one. Engineers work with models to explore and test concepts If the model fails to duplicate reality in a meaningful way, it is turfed. If it’s really bad, the theory behind it is turfed. The climate “model” is a perfect example of something that should have been deep sixed. None of what it predicted has actually happened. The claims you can determine the temperature of earth to two decimal points 3000 years ago by a half dozen tree rings is stretching it to say the least.
Your evidence that peer review is corrupt is that… sometimes the scientific community reaches conclusions you don’t like or disagree with.
James Lindsay says different.
James Lindsay submitted bogus papers in the humanities, not science.
At any rate, peer review catches many poor or fraudulent papers, but it’s not capable of catching them all. That doesn’t make it corrupt, just imperfect.
So what do we do?
Stop all funding of research by the government.