Please subscribe!!! Also, PubPeer comments can be found here:

When does Elisabeth Bik get a Nobel Prize?

Science is now doing what peer review should have been doing the last 2 decades.

If there is ever going to be a prize for showing fraud, this should be called the Elizabeth Bik prize.

The desperate need for funding has corrupted ALL the sciences 😢

$350,000 a year in California. With that, he should be able to afford a 1-bedroom apartment and a pizza from Domino's once a week.

When your success in academia depends largely on the quality and relevance of your research, it’s no surprise that people fabricate data. There are essentially an infinite number of directions you can research, and the majority are dead ends. Imagine working your whole life in a merit-based system, climbing to the very top, then getting passed over because you happened to pick a research direction that was a dead-end, which you couldn’t have known was a dead end ahead of time. You can either attribute the last few years of your life to “at least others know not to do it this way now”, but the temptation to fabricate some results is very real.

This is why I always photograph extra unpublished blots to create unique forgeries.

As someone who as owned quite of few dogs, I find them eating my homework more believable than it being "compression artifacts" as would happen with low resolution rendering.

Alternative title, Stanford professor has 35 papers scrutinized, penas retracts

Elisabeth Bik is the real MVP. When these institutions fire some of these fraudsters they should send the discoverer that employee's would-be bonus or 6 months salary upon termination. It would show that they actually care about integrity and encourage academic honesty rather than just acting aghast and brushing things under the rug. Encouraging honesty and sending a message that academia can have a future when trust in institutions is at an all-time low.

another month another fraud

Professor at a top university, at the forefront of medical research:

A med student friend of mine asked her adviser if she should go into research, or medical practice.

The bigger problem is that negative results don’t get published. So everyone will try to fudge their data, conclusions and say there is something significant.

I love the fact that you took note of your audience's reaction to your first academia is broken videos and took action. Your action resulted in this channel becoming one of the most unique channels covering these subjects.

Oh yeah, science is science and people are flawed. That's why we need people like Pete and Elizabeth Bik to identify flaws and perform corrections.

As a supervisor it is also your role to verify the data and ask uncomfortable question-At least that is the case in Germany... Maybe you can mess it up once or twice but not 30 times.... You do get so much money BECAUSE you have to do this tidious task, you can not just rest on your past distinctions...

I think

'Hotshot Bot Sought, Caught Fraught Blot Plot'