As of four years ago the US Dept. of Energy was giving out over $2 Billion in annual science grants. You can guess what for.

​@@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb7836Papers on energy ?

@@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb7836global warming?

Or let’s guess, to cure something developed in a China lab

There is no way any of the studies published about global warming contain fraud, just ask Sabine.

Yes, too little incentives to do that

That’s why one should never adapt an opinion unreflected. You can ditch alot of studies just by checking their authors, funding and possible agenda and evaluating their results vs. your own educated experience and knowledge (if you happen to have such).

There is no money there, which I would love to see changed.

they should adopt the blockchain model: A transaction (paper) is not valid until at least 5 blocks (similar papers) have confirmed it. Not that this will ever happen, with how utterly sting funding for science already is

Harvard did a study that concluded about half of published papers contained results that could not be replicated.

What corrupt scientific society? If making up conspiracy theories is your MO, isn’t it more likely that you were bad at your work and you now have a chip on your shoulder, hence the complete lack of evidence for anything you claimed. Any fool can invent conspiracy theories. Valid and verified evidence is required to show they are true and you have demonstrably provided none.

no rational person takes you seriously if you say you're a scientist anymore. i ran into the replication crisis myself with papers on atmospheric rendering of all things. and that's not even a politically or economically charged topic with lots of money and power insisting on a specific result. if you really have a phd in chemistry, you should find a way of doing something useful with it. we need less corruption in science, research, and development, not the exodus of the non-corrupt.

@@royhammel5205 you love to corner and manipulate people with nothing. Sad.

Many former pharmaceutical employees have said they've signed NDA's hiding the cure for cancer. All about $$$

Many former pharmaceutical employees say they've ALL signed NDA's hiding cures for cancer

Because the institutions are on the take ($) by foreign governments.

We were never supposed to have put that much faith in them in the first place. A correction to normal skepticism is a good thing. Caveat emptor is rendered in Latin for a reason. It's not newly relevant advice.

It's becoming time to fix things.

We did lose this much faith back during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and some countries came out just fine. Of course, those that didn't started WWII and caused genocides and all sorts of suffering...

Is it frightening that we're losing faith or is it frightening that they are demonstrating that they are not worthy of our faith?

Same with the Nobel prize.

True and if views and likes are the measure then science education is not the goal anymore either, right?

@@undercoveragent9889 certainly we can see this across KZfaq with clickbait - though there's still SOME incentive to provide good content to get subs.

rewarding A while hoping for B

I didn't know this had a name, thanks for sharing. It's a problem in education that learning and assessment often end up getting tangled up.

Plagiarism.

That's theft

That is totally against research ethics. Why didn't they fire this guy?

That’s not fraud, that’s theft.

@@SurfinScientistfire him? That would require the universities to be respectable. They are nothing but brainwashing hubs, manipulating students to be future sheep.

It's like true scientists are feeling what Galileo must have felt.

Shameful. I have had dissolusioning experiences with some people. Bureaucrats at the University of Sydney (I believe in naming and shaming) backed one VIP (Very Important Psychopath) against me with devastating personal and career results, including prosecution on false criminal charges. I beat the rap, the Judge declaring that I was an unusual person. I said to the gentleman from the NSW Ombudsman's office that I had thought universities were places where honesty and integrity mattered. He laughed out loud. I said go ahead. I feel I have just admitted to finding out there is no Easter Bunny. Sorry you let a rotten apple put you off a career. They are in all walks of life and professions. I hope things are working out for you.

All of his criticisms of you are transparently projections, and are the classic signature of people with either narcissistic or sociopathic personality disorders. These are widespread in our society, and not simply in traditional suspected locations like politics and law but also science Industry etcetera.

This is so hope depleating😢

Agreed. This has also been my experience

I am so sorry it happened but I hope you keep being you because you were in the right. We need more people like you.

That makes my blood boil

Nasty but I'm not surprised TBH.

Why not name the publication?

Maybe because he doesn't want to get sued.​@@ninakore

So the publisher didn't select random anonymous peers in the first place, and knew it was you who pointed out the misquote?

a restatement of regulatory capture.

Sounds like the ethics of Communism . The leaders get the best of everything.

@@thomasmartin406 Regulatory capture is a special case of the more general principle.

I was not aware of this saying. Thank you. Just went to a school referendum meeting and it was evident that the focus was on support of the public school institution and not the education of students. Very evident especially when school vouchers get discussed.

@@deanh1449 Yea - the preachers of choice suddenly change their tune when the choice of some one else appears.

Then prove it! You forgot to do so.

The problem and i think her point is, the information is being presented as a result of the scientific method. Alot of the time not being thoroughly being peer reviewed or at best let slide.

@michaelabney3486 You're missing my point.

Quite appropriate.

​@@FourthRootnah they did get your point and you both offer valuable contributions to the discourse

@@nofme No, the data is not necessarily even collected scientifically.

look up what she thinks is the cause of the replication crisis.

Yeah. I doubt it's much different from before. It's probably just that people are more honest about it.

A lot of truths of a false narrative has come out into the open in the last eight years.

@@royhammel5205 What does she think the cause is?

In school in the 50s & it was a problem.

Really? Do you mean crime plays a significant part in every religious organisation? What is your evidence for that claim?

Indeed. Those who deny it are either ignorant of the evidence, or stalling until they get their share of the profits.

@@uprightfossil6673 That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed in the same way.

@@niblick616 unfortunately there is so much evidence that presenting all of it is a daunting task in itself. The sheer number of anecdotal tales confirmed by witnesses alone is only one of the many reasons mistrust and distrust in gooberment and bureaucracy is running rampant. The small fraction of tin foil hat wearing outliers are the ones used to dismiss all claims by the offending officials. But deniers who dismiss the claims don’t see the truckers protests and farmers protests as relevant. Deniers being mostly gooberment officials and bureaucrats and the people who aspire to such positions. 😤

​@@niblick616 OP was hyperbolic but I'm sure you could think of a few instances of wrongdoing in... religions out there, let's keep it at that.

After recently retiring, I was curious how things were going in my former field. Twenty years ago, I could easily keep up with all relevant publications. Ten years ago, not so much. Now, not a snowball's chance in heck. It used to be all serious researchers. Based on my recent revisiting of my old field , there's stuff that's now published that's really more appropriate for a homework problem, and it takes way too long to sift through the nonsense to find the good stuff.

Maybe we shouldn't have forced everybody into getting a degree and then told them "go STEM and go home" just to be able to make a living wage to sustain a one bedroom flat in the inner city. Too many idle degrees = too many people looking into their own ways to make good, ethics be damned.

My field is medical statistics. Forty years ago someone doing methodology might be one of the authors of a paper every year. Now it is several papers per year. What they now do is develop methodology for data they haven’t seen.

Wow 5 million new unique insights a year! Science is on a roll!

@@slizzysluzzer I don't think it matters, you and everyone affected by these policies and developments are a drop in a bucket. Most papers are Chinese and Indian by a huge huge margin. It's a side effect of them increasing their standard of living and not wanting to be left behind again. Though these papers are usually... well i pretty much don't have words to describe a typical Indian paper today, still, do you want to be the one lagging behind India in 20-30 years? Of course all of this is going to generate inefficiencies. But progress is also the foundation of prosperity. So what's the solution?

Most people who deny science aren't doing it because they have issues with modern publishing practices. They deny things like evolution, climate science, medical science, and so forth. Their denial is motivated by some religious or anti-science bias, or some conspiracy theory, or willful ignorance; not reasonable skepticism. No one who has issue with modern publishing practices can be called a science denialist. But those who use that problem to make blanket reductionist statements about science in general are science denialists. And they indeed should not be listened to.

This is why I'm calling for all raw datasets to be freely available for all papers.

Not in our modern cheap-is-trump culture

Not even just monetary. In my field you will lose your licence unless you are publishing an insane number of papers. It's unbelievable actually

Frank Wilczek approves.

But if you lie, you'll get caught eventually, and then, someone will show you the inside of a prison cell.

@@ColonelFredPuntridge In the world I would want to live in, yes that would happen. However this problem will not go away with a simplistic solution. Some of the lies are so deeply ingrained people would actually defend the deception instead of accept the truth. For example: Secondhand smoking. If you ask any doctor "How many cases of lung problems or anything can you link back to sencondhand smoke?" I guarantee you you will NEVER find one. I know that is a silly one and obviously it is a good idea to limit exposure to people who don't want to be around it and not have it around those who shouldn't be exposed at all, but honestly I don't think there is enough evidence or data other than it sounds like a good idea to not accidentally inhale smoke you aren't smoking lol

@@ColonelFredPuntridge lol, on what planet?

Isn't climate change the biggest example. When you have a Dept. of Climate Change at a university, how many of their articles are going to claim it's no big deal?

I’m sure I don’t have to tell you tell you that one of the purposes of universities was supposed to insulate science from politics. But when the people running these centers are postmodern lefties, everything is political. 😕

Why did you choose to pervert your own scientific results? Did someone force you to do what you claim you did? Please provide their names, positions and all your valid evidence. Were you awarded any money as a result of your lying? From which body and for which project did you steal it?

@@niblick616 Do you actually think he's going to answer any of those questions? I don't think he will. I wouldn't.

@@briancrawford8751 1/ If the OP wants to be taken seriously, yes I do. 2/ That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed in the same way. 3/ Any fool can make up allegations. 4/ Providing at least some valid and verified evidence is what helps separates the conspiracy theorists from the honest. 5/ I note that you wouldn't provide any evidence for any similar claims either. Thanks for making my point.

i'm not saying you're wrong, but...we're in a public forum. you're asking him to admit to details of committing a crime he was coerced into committing by the government and/or corporations. maybe you haven't been watching the news lately? do you know what happens to people who blow the whistle on government and corporate corruption? they go to prison forever. the guy who testified against hunter biden just got indicted...not with any evidence, but simply on a claim by the FBI that he made it up. the fbi colluded with amazon to put a guy in prison for refusing to lie under oath admitting a crime he didn't commit, among other things, and that legal battle is still ongoing. julian assange has been in prison for over a decade without being charged for a crime because he embarrassed the US armed forces, the CIA and hillary clinton as well as leaking that the 2016 democratic primary was rigged. we're living in a dangerous time and you're asking him to lay his neck in a guillotine. the wikipedia thing is well known. they regularly change articles based on current events to support a narrative. it's not just wikipedia. all the popular dictionaries regularly change definitions for the same reason. if you don't believe me, look up the definition of marriage before 2000 and compare it to now in all major dictionaries. @@niblick616

Very funny. Gave me a chuckle

😂😂😂. Thanks!

You forgot the /S label at the end of your post for the dripping sarcasm.

@@michaelrains64295 now I know

​@@michaelrains64295 it has enough sarcasm to not need it

I've had to replicate many papers myself. The methods are simple, and I know what I'm doing. However, so many cannot be replicated and sometimes the thermodynamics don't even make sense. For example, I know that you can't make magnetite under these conditions, and sure enough the material I make is different. It slows progress and weakens the foundation of science.

So how is it to work for a system that supports and endorses these people while they expect YOU to provide critical infrastructure support so that they can forward their plan to create more such a people? It seems to me, like a positive feedback loop!

Military intelligence... the greatest example of an oxymoron.

True dat! But you should add: "[...] And when the lies become obvious, they cease to matter at all. They only delay the ultimate knowledge and truth by a short time, and make the discoveries a little more expensive."

@@Alondro77 I regret to inform you that if you believe that this is oxymoron, they have already won. This is actually the greatest accumulation of experts that you can find in any field, with areas of research (among other, much more related to their original purpose) such as social engineering, state space cultural control of population, decision influencing and non-linear social systems. There is where the current research of social studies and computing emanates.

and when the paymaster has an agenda to push it is the perfect storm.

"...we own the science...", "... I am the science...", "....solid science...", "...scientific consensus...", "...trust the science..."... are all common platitudes pushed time-and-again.

@@templarroystonofvasey "science is settled"😅 the hallmark of a snake oil salesman

@@rhetorical1488 Nice, I think Brian Cox likes that one.

@@templarroystonofvasey "scientific consensus" is a very real thing and should not be dismissed without serious counter evidence. The others are red flags.

planetary size large iceberg me thinks.

But the part of the iceberg which you don't see - the underwater part - becomes visible when it begins to matter. That's the good news. The truth will out, when we need it.

Imagine seeing the bottom of the iceberg?

When there is fraud is 1 example how science ceases to be science.

Popular science writers, videomakers must teach ignorants about the scientific method and "what is science according to Isaac Asimov ", knowing there are not many asimovs ....

Bribery is science is only likely because we have given away all of an individuals rights. The rights that really matter like our ability to sue for meaningful sums or in actual courts with actual juries(you give up this right any time you sign a terms and conditions form.. online or off. That's because of right wing psychopaths systematically bamboozling y'all. )The rights limited that cause bribery though? Are that they gave rights to corporations and they abuse it. Scientific achievements never result in any single individual or even multiple hands on scientists having any legally binding right to sell their creations. They always belong to the corporations and even if you decide to leave a corporation with policies you don't agree with? You aren't legally allowed to discuss things you invented or even seek work in a remotely related field. They destroy their ability to create income yet not one single conservative seems to give a shit despite jobs & keeping Americans employed bbeing something they pretend to care about most.

Somebody needs to look up the definition of science, again... and again... and again. ;-)

Yeah, that's not what science is. Science is a methodology and a way of thinking, not academic consensus.

That's what the covidians and libshits have turned 'science' into. In the same way they turned men into woman and failed brown cultures into future "engineers".

pedo island trumps money

For a field on which people rely to understand the world but also drug interactions and risks, it becoming worse is not something to be looked forward to because credibility is being questioned industry wide. People will avoid vaccines in future because of what happened over the last few years. Even if there is solid evidence, people may have to wait decades for reproducibility in clinical studies. This has huge repercussions.

It’s not like exposing financial corruption which hurts the people who have lost money now but helps everyone relatively soon after. This will have long running repercussions, people avoiding treatments because of lack of faith (see the last 4 years), clinical studies having to be reproduced and taking longer to get cleared, for example.

​@@TheBaumcm GOOD! People should avoid treatments that were not scientifically sound in their studies, because the whole point of the ACTUAL scientific method is that most things the "experts" decide are wrong, if they are not subjected to rigorous testing. The last four years, people who foolishly accepted the lies and incompetence of the "experts", and their treatments, have died far faster than those who did not trust them. The latter have been proven correct at every turn. And it's even better if all those studies that were untrustworthy must be done over. There is NO progress in studies with bad methodology. Their very existence is LOST ground.

​@@TheBaumcm Credibility MUST be questioned. The foundation of credibility must be EARNING credibility, it must never be given by default, and credence especially must never be given to scientists or authorities unless they constantly, at every turn, prove they deserve it. The last few years have been proof that the authorities must NEVER be trusted by default. They were wrong, and killed huge numbers of people with their bad responses and treatments. Without reproducibility there IS no solid evidence. Your kind of anti-science attitude is deadly.

You're not dated and old fashioned, the people that think that of people like you are the problem themselves. This moral relativism coming out of this thinking that the new is always better, that progress only moves forward, etc.. is what took us to this mess. I am those who think morality and ethics are absolutes and are not to change with times. And this is a scientific forum, so you will not agree with me on this, but atheism and Godlessness is the problem with the new generations. Feel free to disagree on that one.

rwb I agree with you and had the same experience. But there is a place for us. Resilient small communities where we can rebuild civilization. We need to find like minded others and do this. I went to a small island in Japan and welcome others of like mind.

@@kuba2ve The problem with moral relativism is also self-solving... when enough people realize they can 'morally' justify purging the 'immoral'. It's happened before... that's how Rome became the Catholic Church in a nut-shell, after all. Constantine was like, "Sayyyyy... if I embrace this popular new religion, make a few tweaks here and there... I can get rid of all the trouble makers and the populace will back me up on it! Now to make sure I get a military 'miracle' for propaganda.." Alondro knows... ALONDRO WAS THERE... whispering into Constantine's ear. >:}

@@Alondro77 You need to read Church History from the start, but from valid sources, not the secular sources that are always intent on blackwashing it for obvious purposes. Again, this is not the place to evangelize people, or talk about Religion (I know your kind). Have a good day, and God Bless you.

​@@Alondro77Yeah; It was all to take back control of the populace. Too many people knew the true, original teachings of Jesus. It was done purely to edit the bible. That's why no one but clergymen were allowed to read Latin centuries later. And they remained pagan in private.

Absolutely! And it should be legislated to include the mainstream media as well so that they are incentivized to actually vet the stories they promote too.

i guess you aren't too familiar with how academic publishing works. Publishers (at least privately owned ones) are interested in selling subscriptions (mostly sold to consortia of universities). The vetting process is done "for free" by academics themselves! The editor at the journal after a brief initial assessment of the suitability of a submitted manuscript in their journal, (if not they reject immediately), sends the paper to anonymous (to the manuscript authors) reviewers, who are typically themselves academics in the field from which the paper originates. They spend some hours looking at the paper, its data, and the background literature and send their assessment of the manuscript back to the editor. The editor then decides if the paper should be published in the journal. If so, The authors get a copy of these reviews and are requested to respond to them and send a revision to the editor. If editor and reviewers are satisfied it gets published. The whole chain relies on the good will of those involved. If the publisher, editor, and authors are only interested in publishing and don't care about the quality, you get garbage published, and everyone profits. One way to disincentivize this practice is for university consortia to separate journals with good practices from those that are just publication mills. However, this is more easily said than done, and some publishers (notably the one mentioned by Sabine) are quite litigious, and so you need a legally speaking strong case to do this. It is a big problem and the academic community is grappling with how to deal with it. Science has always relied on publication to disseminate new knowledge and to build on existing knowledge with further work.

@@tokenghost7777 Fox News took a big hit from Dominion Voting Machines, but they’ve profited so much from their MO, they just paid the fine and continue to put their spin on things. Executives don’t fear financial penalties because it rarely impacts them directly. If criminal charges were in the mix, and sometimes they are, that’s a different ball game. Unfortunately, however, the first amendment is very important, so it should be a difficult task to impugn someone for making false claims unless you can show that malice was involved and not simply error. The Fairness Doctrine was overturned in the eighties. This required all media outlets to give equal airtime to both sides of an issue to prevent an excessively biased narrative. I don’t think this applies to the news itself, but opinion segments where talking heads discussed a political or social topic. The new should be delivered with sobriety and as little hype or sensationalism as possible, but that doesn’t get the ratings. This is nothing new, however. Yellow journalism got us into the Spanish American War and Americas foray into imperialism. The market place of ideas is supposed to guard against bias as well, but it really doesn’t work very well. People tend to go to sources that support their ideology and are dismissive of others.

​@@tokenghost7777Not only mainstream media... ANY news source, whether they own a skyscraper or live in my mom's basement (don't get me started) should have to vet their stories, and be punished for repeatdly lying. We'd therefore need fact checkers, and since people can't seem to agree about what's real, people from each cartel would try to bribe the fact checkers. Therefore, I volunteer to be a fact checker.

maybe we should punish those that are at fault of spouting bogus "science"... We could start with Anthony Fauci over here in the states.

Well that’s depressing

its edited by athoritative sources its no different than the rest of the naritive.

@@HaakonOdinsson I will say that I believe what will happen is that people will become less and less interested in the news as they realize that it can’t even be trusted anymore. And this will simply lead to a world where people live in real life way more than they ever lived online, while still using online for their entertainment and stuff. I’m willing to bet the future of this country (The US) will be very outdoors and very physical and concrete. It would make sense too, as it would be a cultural pendulum sort of thing.

@@HaakonOdinsson My other reply TO YOU got deleted as well! Jesus Christ It’s POSSIBLE that Sabine has it set up herself to delete comments with certain keywords in it, as I am very certain I have read comments saying something similar to yours on other videos which have not gotten removed. I suppose it is possible an AI is determining which comments to remove using some esoteric principle other than just keywords, but I have no reason to believe that’s happening _just_ yet. I’ve seen straight up hate speech that doesn’t use slurs not get deleted before.

@@VerbDoesStuff I would argue that news hasn't been trustful already for quite some time even without any AI.

Oh it's a lot more than 1 paper from new york. :(

There's some uncertainty about the location. Every time you make a measurement you get a different city. Not US but I think it's been observed in several cities in the UK.

That's a good point. The retraction/correction ought to be on the same page that the original story was on.

I live in a tiny rural redneck town in Colorado. Same crap here. Doesn't matter WHERE, it's a common practice of editors. A great click bait story is just one more lie. Sadly, it takes more than a week, sometimes it's months later.

I think that newspaper is all of them everywhere. 50 years ago, Florida Today had a front page story with click bait headline, and the next week buried a correction where no one would notice. It concerned a hot button issue coming up for election and the retraction made it irrelevant to that issue. They at least printed my letter to the editor calling them out for it.

Who exactly? You forgot to provide any evidence!

non - profits my arse... lol

In the past we had crystal balls, I'm wondering if we shouldn't go back to using them.

"Publish or perish."

Many of the problems start at the post graduate level, where students know that to get a postdoctoral degree they need a certain number of publications that have been accepted. What seems to happen is that there is a design problem with their experiments, usually the number of observations is too small. So then they try different analysis methods to get them p

Which scientists?

You get what you pay for. Low paying, fickle, short-term contracts, dished out by well-paid careerist administrators are below the paygrade of aspiring researchers who know they're getting paid less than someone working at McDonnald's lol

I received my Ph. D. in a Science many decades ago and decided to go into the private sector. You have to understand that to get to the level were you are paid a reasonable salary and have some security you have to spend typically a decade, maybe two decades living like a student. When I was in graduate school, I knew a few post-docs in their late 30s. The competition to get one of those few Academic jobs, after so much sacrifice, is incredible. I'm not shocked that there is so much fraud in Science and I'm shocked that su*cide is not sky high.

Would you accept hosting me in your house for six months (food and lodging)? No charge of course. Let's put that pesky "wealth and money" thing behind us. Never thought of traveling this way before, but your reply sparked this insanity. What is it in spanish? Mi casa, su casa?

thats true, money and filthy finances literally corrupt everything, institutions, processes, minds, people

you may not have understood that most money for "science" comes from out of control governments around the world, and yes that includes the USA, who always want more power. there's a reason why almost every politically relevant paper basically says we have catastrophic problems and we need the governments to solve them. if they didn't say that they'd lose their funding.

Money and wealth are not the problem. The selfishness already there in the hearts of people is the problem. When was the last time anyone had to teach a child to lie, to steal, or to be rude when doing so suits their selfish ends?

In my hodunk college they couldn't even check papers properly for plagiarism. It appeared to be an automated check, so if it wasn't in their article database, they didn't care. Some chick in one of the groups I was in just copied paragraphs straight off a website, no problem.

In reviewing papers, I came across more than one example of people who couldn't convert units correctly. This used to be high-school chemistry stuff. A couple of decades later, a friend who was the dean of our vet school complained that his students couldn't do unit conversions. Add another decade or two and...

I agree. I am doing a PhD and my masters was more rigorous than my PhD courses. The students don’t know the basics. I was asked to TA a course and was asked to pass through students who didn’t know the basics. I kind of feel like not finishing the program because it feels like a joke, but I also don’t like the idea of my colleagues being the ones becoming professors teaching the next generation.

Unless it has to do with some political agenda I agree with /s

One of the great commandments of science is, 'Mistrust arguments from authority'. (Scientists, being primates, and thus given to dominance hierarchies, of course do not always follow this commandment.) - Carl Sagan The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (1996), 31.

💯

Especially global warming

No, this is a stupid and unproductive attitude to have. You are pretending like every paper out there is faked nowadays which it absolutely isn't. Trust, but verify. That's the only sensible way to operate.

If anything you have claimed is true then why have you failed to name a single person involved?

"Publish or perish" is the phrase.

If the Chinese had to use paper to publish there would be no trees in China

@@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb7836 Right. Couldn't quite remember it on the spot, so invented my own spin. Thanks for reminding.

@@alexxx4434 You mean it wasn't a joke derived from the "irritated word sequences" section of the video?

​@@Sonny_McMacsson Not even a little bit. It's one of the reasons I dropped out of academia, along with the stunningly bad career prospects for even capable researchers. The current system is just broken.

Never has been. I am not sure where this deified moral scientist trope comes from. Perhaps the massive propaganda we are pumped all the time. We have so many examples to reference, they are people as well. But let's pretend not; there's money to be made.

I'm sure all of those exist somewhere, but I don't think they're the driving factor compared to simple career incentives ("publish publish publish"). Your perspective on this does seem a bit politically driven to me though...

@@ska042 Maybe the cause for publish or perish takes it roots into politics/profit-based-economy. Then both of you would be right.

​@@ska042it's my observation that people who accuse others of motivated reasoning usually have motivations for their reasoning 😎

Scientists and academics are human. They have all the same pettiness, ego and self-interest issues that the general population has. They have to make a living like everyone else, but the way research is funded, both in universities and the private sector, creates incentives for scientists to do whatever is necessary to keep their job and/or reputation, even if it means steering conclusions in a particular direction or just pushing as many papers out the door as possible, regardless of quality. While the effort they put in to developing a deeper knowledge of their field should be respected, and most of them do act ethically, they shouldn't be put on a pedestal. That said, if you want to argue about science being dogma, ideological, or an illegitimate basis for public policy then you are probably being a hypocrite, because ideology is almost certainly what you are bringing to the argument. Individuals and groups of scientists can be dogmatic, but that doesn't mean science is dogma. Unless you have more expertise than the scientists you are condemning, you're just trying to inject the opinions of a layperson into a contest of evidence you don't have the ability to definitively interpret.

If we made truth the goal, there wouldn't be so many problems. Unfortunately, not so.

You know what's also a problem? People who like over exaggerating like you

@@toxic_narcissist? go away? what kind of nonsense reply is this

Yep

​@ILLUMINATED-1 well at least they told the truth in their name 😆

Ding, ding, ding... winner. They system is broken. many "scientist" have become just as dirty as politicians.

The truth sets you free. But too many people don't want free: they want money.

I believe you are right on the money. Politicisation is the main issue and it penetrates the entire body of society and therefore also science. Thruth is relative.

The legacy status. Let's not forget universities are country clubs for some kids. The Wharton School of Business has produced some amazing people, who lose 350 million dollars because they such great businessman.

​@@kareanderssonTruth is not THAT relative.

Yikes. That sounds like it might not have been politics as much as outright blackmail or extortion.

@@kareandersson Truth isn't relative, it's just not affordable to the average household.

Absolutely. The elephant on this thread is that so few people ever provided any valid and verified evidence for their claims and conspiracy theories.

The present is not a good time for dedicated scientists. It's like the return of the dark ages.

@@Bob_Adkins Where is your evidence, because you have provided none?

@@niblick616 Don't let your bias get in the way. Step back and ask yourself if someone will profit from research being skewed in a certain way. Organizations buy research, and it's very expensive. For a few dollars more, they can get the results they were hoping for. Don't be lazy, it's all over the Internet, from very honest people like Dr John Campbell, Dr John

@@niblick616 I tried, but YT won't allow it. I'll try again: Dr John Campbell, Dr John Robson, and Pete Judo are good sources.

+1

The trend is heading that way, we have been told to expect to have to upload everything within the next 2 years when we publish. Not sure it will help, AAAS and Nature have both required more uploaded data than most other papers. I have tried to download data only to find it is not really there, or the samples have working ID's with no map to the final ID making it useless.

Don´t you know her book "Lost in Math", published 2018? She describes the problem very accurately there.

Well, if you organize startup, you'll be begging investors for money as well.

@@dmitripogosian5084 And if you work in R&D for a large company, you have to beg for money as well--at the organization, department, group, and project levels.

Where is your evidence for your claims? You forgot to provide any whatsoever.

Situations like what? You forgot to say or provide any evidence for anything you claimed.

If one can line up referees to review a fake paper, one can line up friends to repro the fake results. Just moves the problem around.

​@@SkorjOlafsenthe more people involved the harder it is to keep the secret though.

in programming we are required to write automated testing for our assertions that code is correct. I feel like there could be something like this, but in some fields it's not quite as simple. It would also highlight several quite serious measurement issues we have going on currently in which I fully believe any prediction made upon complex systems gets lossier and lossier the further you look into the future. I admit this is my bias and my research bleeding in here, but I think we'll come to find more often than not any prediction 10~ years out is basically a guaranteed falsehood.

Lets just hope they dont bury the victims near a subterrainian insect province.

Where is your evidence? You forgot to provide any!

And most importantly for them, consequences avoided as tens of thousands expire.

Publishing bribes are usually called "advertising". The whole Lot of Media, which uses adverts for income generation, is bribed, essentially. And YES, i mean ALL media. not just scientific.

Back in 1990's I was told that the great number of Chinese engineers would be publishing more than every other country - seems to be true -

don't worry, the free market will figure it out ;)

It's a direct result of emphasis of number of publications, rather than quality in grant applications and promotion.

Those funding the research get the result they want to support whatever endeavor they are embarking upon. That's how it works. If they don't get the result they want then they just trash the "study" and find another institute willing to give them what they want. This is how paid research at universities works as well, and I learned that from a research scientist at a prestigious university in Canada. It's how we have so many pharma drugs on the market that are dangerous or do little or nothing beyond placebo. Sadly, many scientists are somewhat religious in their conviction that "science" is pure and not wrought with corruption, they that is changing, slowly and surely.

Bingo! Ivermectin is a known safe and successful drug.

@@wngimageanddesign9546 when doctors are having their practices threatened for prescribing it, you KNOW something’s up.

A Himalayan rock salt lamp sized lump of salt.

and peper, lots of peper...

Or, the science is settled!

@@knerduno5942 With a computer model? You, my friend, have never designed a computer model.

--Bill Nye the so-called "Science" Guy@@atillathehungry3145

and by over they ment... most...

Where is your evidence that anything you just claimed is true? Don’t you have any? Maybe you just produced a bad paper with no evidence- just like your post?

completely underscored comment. Mmh, what conclusion then follows for this video l wonder?

‘Publish or parish’. Absolutely hilarious.

We all think you are idiots. No thinking person has trusted acedemia for over a century. The brightest minds in the world have the most contemptible and corrupt system in place, so very contrary to its empirical roots, and finding are whatever you want them to be. Institutionalized hypocrisy at the highest levels. "May induce distrust" is a long gone conclusion we troglodites settled on eons ago.

Just look at the plagarism outbreak that plagues the highest level of 'Murican universities. It's all a scam.

she cant know everything gotta cope with being a vaxxtard

She doesnt know what she is talking about. I have read most of the papers and it is sad to see how easy it is to manipulate the scientific discourse.

Let's not give any spotlight to liars.