What may be even worse is when the president of the university won't let you publish a good paper because it refutes what the donor is trying to prove and the president doesn't want the university to lose the research grant.
@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb78366 ай бұрын
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.
@WideCuriosity6 ай бұрын
@@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb7836Papers on energy ?
@roygorman66246 ай бұрын
@@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb7836global warming?
@roygorman66246 ай бұрын
Or let’s guess, to cure something developed in a China lab
@Christopher_Hensley6 ай бұрын
There is no way any of the studies published about global warming contain fraud, just ask Sabine.
@Name-ot3xw6 ай бұрын
My main problem with scientific publishing is that there is very little focus on replication. I'm taking bets on how many studies we could throw away if we were to make a serious effort towards replication, I put myself down for about half.
@SabineHossenfelder6 ай бұрын
Yes, too little incentives to do that
@woody4426 ай бұрын
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).
@freedomandguns32316 ай бұрын
There is no money there, which I would love to see changed.
@kurtmueller20896 ай бұрын
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
@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb78366 ай бұрын
Harvard did a study that concluded about half of published papers contained results that could not be replicated.
@jannieschluter96706 ай бұрын
I am PhD Chemist. what you are waking up to is the reason why I am unemployed and proud of it. There is no good reason to be a scientist in this corrupt scientific society.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
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.
@royhammel52055 ай бұрын
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.
@jannieschluter96705 ай бұрын
@@royhammel5205 you love to corner and manipulate people with nothing. Sad.
@kevinoconnor29215 ай бұрын
Many former pharmaceutical employees have said they've signed NDA's hiding the cure for cancer. All about $$$
@kevinoconnor29215 ай бұрын
Many former pharmaceutical employees say they've ALL signed NDA's hiding cures for cancer
@kdbublitz885 ай бұрын
I don't think people have ever lost this much faith in our institutions.. It is absolutely frightening.
@craigpennington12515 ай бұрын
Because the institutions are on the take ($) by foreign governments.
@kma36475 ай бұрын
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.
@lystic93923 ай бұрын
It's becoming time to fix things.
@unconventionalideas56833 ай бұрын
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...
@hajo20242 ай бұрын
Is it frightening that we're losing faith or is it frightening that they are demonstrating that they are not worthy of our faith?
@patrickdaly10886 ай бұрын
I think this is a great example of Goodhart's law. "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure." If number of papers is the measure, then science isn't even the goal anymore.
@thearpox78736 ай бұрын
Same with the Nobel prize.
@undercoveragent98896 ай бұрын
True and if views and likes are the measure then science education is not the goal anymore either, right?
@zacharyb27236 ай бұрын
@@undercoveragent9889 certainly we can see this across KZfaq with clickbait - though there's still SOME incentive to provide good content to get subs.
@oldcowbb6 ай бұрын
rewarding A while hoping for B
@andyk21816 ай бұрын
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.
@user-ei9me2xt9d6 ай бұрын
I worked in the physics dept when an undergraduate, so I knew many of the grad students and professors. It was common knowledge that one prolific professor who was a phys rev referee would reject a submitted paper and then assume the research himself, another egregious type of fraud.
@jannikheidemann38056 ай бұрын
Plagiarism.
@alexos87416 ай бұрын
That's theft
@SurfinScientist6 ай бұрын
That is totally against research ethics. Why didn't they fire this guy?
@WarrenPuffet6 ай бұрын
That’s not fraud, that’s theft.
@WarrenPuffet6 ай бұрын
@@SurfinScientistfire him? That would require the universities to be respectable. They are nothing but brainwashing hubs, manipulating students to be future sheep.
@appalachianamerican71715 ай бұрын
It's been bad for decades. Now it's so obvious it can no longer be hidden.
@Bob_Adkins5 ай бұрын
It's like true scientists are feeling what Galileo must have felt.
@coderman27546 ай бұрын
the vaccines are safe and effective 😢
@jackh8596 ай бұрын
Thanks for this Sabine. I decided against pursuing a career in academia when I interned with an academic at the University of Oxford last summer who admitted to flagrantly falsifying validation stats for his papers as he "couldn't be bothered" to derive them honestly but was "pretty sure" his models were going to be 90+% accurate anyhow. I was visibly aghast at this - he clearly sensed this and spent the remainder of my placement chastising me for being "arrogant" and "acting like I know better than everyone" and then didn't respond to my reference request. Seems bullies are rewarded in academic power structures even more so than in corporate ones. I'm now very cynical about novel findings in papers and wait for them to be widely replicated before I believe them.
@pshehan16 ай бұрын
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.
@douglaswatt15826 ай бұрын
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.
@walkingwith_dinosaurs6 ай бұрын
This is so hope depleating😢
@zah9366 ай бұрын
Agreed. This has also been my experience
@zah9366 ай бұрын
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.
@lwmarti6 ай бұрын
I used to review papers for a few publications. Once I noted how a particular reference didn't actually say what the referring author said it did. That particular topic was never even mentioned in the reference. After that, that journal stopped asking me to review papers. And, yes, the paper with the suspicious reference got published anyway. 🤔
@yippee85706 ай бұрын
That makes my blood boil
@LuisAldamiz6 ай бұрын
Nasty but I'm not surprised TBH.
@ninakore6 ай бұрын
Why not name the publication?
@williamromine57156 ай бұрын
Maybe because he doesn't want to get sued.@@ninakore
@jannikheidemann38056 ай бұрын
So the publisher didn't select random anonymous peers in the first place, and knew it was you who pointed out the misquote?
@buybuydandavis5 ай бұрын
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy: In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the bureaucracy itself always get in control and those dedicated to the goals the bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less influence, and sometimes are eliminated entirely.
@thomasmartin4065 ай бұрын
a restatement of regulatory capture.
@pholdway58015 ай бұрын
Sounds like the ethics of Communism . The leaders get the best of everything.
@buybuydandavis5 ай бұрын
@@thomasmartin406 Regulatory capture is a special case of the more general principle.
@deanh14495 ай бұрын
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.
@thomasmartin4065 ай бұрын
@@deanh1449 Yea - the preachers of choice suddenly change their tune when the choice of some one else appears.
@elfpimp15 ай бұрын
I guarantee you that for every fraud found more than a dozen gets through. This is as old as humanity.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
Then prove it! You forgot to do so.
@FourthRoot6 ай бұрын
We shouldn't talk about science as though it's a community, an industry, or a collective of any kind. It's a method. What you're referring to is academia, which is not always scientific, even in their "sciences" departments.
@michaelabney34865 ай бұрын
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.
@FourthRoot5 ай бұрын
@michaelabney3486 You're missing my point.
@erigor115 ай бұрын
Quite appropriate.
@nofme5 ай бұрын
@@FourthRootnah they did get your point and you both offer valuable contributions to the discourse
@FourthRoot5 ай бұрын
@@nofme No, the data is not necessarily even collected scientifically.
@deltalima67036 ай бұрын
30 years ago this was already a problem. I am happy to see it finally getting some publicity. Thanks Sabine! 👍
@royhammel52055 ай бұрын
look up what she thinks is the cause of the replication crisis.
@user-dj8rr7gx1b5 ай бұрын
Yeah. I doubt it's much different from before. It's probably just that people are more honest about it.
@mrs.h44845 ай бұрын
A lot of truths of a false narrative has come out into the open in the last eight years.
@Desmond-Dark5 ай бұрын
@@royhammel5205 What does she think the cause is?
@craigpennington12515 ай бұрын
In school in the 50s & it was a problem.
@kurtisb1005 ай бұрын
Meanwhile…. Trust the science bro. Long ago I came to realize the wisdom in Charlie mungers quote “you show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome”. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool.
@AmixLiark6 ай бұрын
The WEF is a group of the most financially Wealthy people in in the world. They fly around on their private jets but insist that others need to reduce their carbon footprint. They have multiple CEO's of international investment firms (like Blackrock) in their ranks. Global investment firms have ownerships in most big corporations and they are also tied to credit lenders. Where do you think most research money and donations come from? It doesn't even need to be bribery - it's can be selective funding based on "preconceived outcomes".
@macbitz6 ай бұрын
Seems there is no area of human endeavour where crime doesn't play a significant part.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
Really? Do you mean crime plays a significant part in every religious organisation? What is your evidence for that claim?
@uprightfossil66735 ай бұрын
Indeed. Those who deny it are either ignorant of the evidence, or stalling until they get their share of the profits.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
@@uprightfossil6673 That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed in the same way.
@uprightfossil66735 ай бұрын
@@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. 😤
@4.0.45 ай бұрын
@@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.
@faolitaruna6 ай бұрын
It should be said that last year more than 5 million scientific papers were published. This is a problem in itself.
@lwmarti6 ай бұрын
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.
@slizzysluzzer6 ай бұрын
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.
@Ken-er9cq6 ай бұрын
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.
@SianaGearz6 ай бұрын
Wow 5 million new unique insights a year! Science is on a roll!
@SianaGearz6 ай бұрын
@@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?
@ocayaro6 ай бұрын
As a physicist, I long ago made the decision to decline to review for certain publishers like MDPI, Hindawi, Frontiers, and others. Also, I do not submit my papers there…especially MDPI.
@KelliAnnWinkler5 ай бұрын
Remember...we have to trust "the science". Don't listen to those people who deny "the science".
@ecMathGeek3 ай бұрын
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.
@ASmithee673 ай бұрын
This is why I'm calling for all raw datasets to be freely available for all papers.
@shadowdragon35216 ай бұрын
The fact that there is a monetary incentive to publish as many papers as possible is a problem in and of itself. Ideally there should be incentives for quality over quantity as well as attempting to reproduce the results of existing studies.
@laaaliiiluuu6 ай бұрын
Not in our modern cheap-is-trump culture
@zah9366 ай бұрын
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
@kennethnichols72636 ай бұрын
Confirmation of the old axion “ Show me the incentives and I’ll show you the outcome”.
@ianstopher91116 ай бұрын
Frank Wilczek approves.
@ColonelFredPuntridge5 ай бұрын
But if you lie, you'll get caught eventually, and then, someone will show you the inside of a prison cell.
@cl2195 ай бұрын
@@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
@SystemUnderSiege5 ай бұрын
@@ColonelFredPuntridge lol, on what planet?
@yaimavol5 ай бұрын
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?
@ColdPotato5 ай бұрын
Too be honest, I see fraud everywhere. It doesn't matter if it's a single person or a large corporation. It happens until they are caught and held accountable.
@michaeldavis43686 ай бұрын
Speaking of Wikipedia, I know of 2 instances where owners of companies and authors of biographies tried to correct errors in Wikipedia and they were not allowed to edit misinformation in their fields of expertise. I left Academia after 10 years because I hated lying in grant proposals and using statistics to justify conclusions that were at best iffy or at worst wrong.
@M0rmagil6 ай бұрын
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. 😕
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
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?
@briancrawford87515 ай бұрын
@@niblick616 Do you actually think he's going to answer any of those questions? I don't think he will. I wouldn't.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
@@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.
@royhammel52055 ай бұрын
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
@manhuawang116 ай бұрын
Luckily this doesn't apply to fields related to public policy with massive budgets and far-reaching global consequences.
@user-od3zt4dg6p5 ай бұрын
Very funny. Gave me a chuckle
@uprightfossil66735 ай бұрын
😂😂😂. Thanks!
@michaelrains642955 ай бұрын
You forgot the /S label at the end of your post for the dripping sarcasm.
@uprightfossil66735 ай бұрын
@@michaelrains64295 now I know
@druhu45905 ай бұрын
@@michaelrains64295 it has enough sarcasm to not need it
@JohnJaneson24496 ай бұрын
I have to read scientific journals regularly for my work in military RnD. I notice that newer papers are full of regurgitations and fluff, no new knowledge at all. They can pass their thesis defenses, but when read for real industrial usage, the lies become obvious.
@baguazhang26 ай бұрын
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.
@christopherneufelt89715 ай бұрын
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!
@Alondro775 ай бұрын
Military intelligence... the greatest example of an oxymoron.
@ColonelFredPuntridge5 ай бұрын
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."
@christopherneufelt89715 ай бұрын
@@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.
@ashardalondragnipurake6 ай бұрын
science has stopped being scientific for a while now
@davidschaftenaar65306 ай бұрын
"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov (HBO's Chernobyl)
@litsci46906 ай бұрын
Promotion and pay depend upon publication. Nothing else matters, and certainly not truth or ethics.
@rhetorical14886 ай бұрын
and when the paymaster has an agenda to push it is the perfect storm.
@templarroystonofvasey6 ай бұрын
"...we own the science...", "... I am the science...", "....solid science...", "...scientific consensus...", "...trust the science..."... are all common platitudes pushed time-and-again.
@rhetorical14886 ай бұрын
@@templarroystonofvasey "science is settled"😅 the hallmark of a snake oil salesman
@templarroystonofvasey6 ай бұрын
@@rhetorical1488 Nice, I think Brian Cox likes that one.
@Nxck24406 ай бұрын
@@templarroystonofvasey "scientific consensus" is a very real thing and should not be dismissed without serious counter evidence. The others are red flags.
@vadymzayets64016 ай бұрын
It is only the very top of a very large iceberg.
@severpop86996 ай бұрын
planetary size large iceberg me thinks.
@ColonelFredPuntridge5 ай бұрын
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.
@roops29395 ай бұрын
Imagine seeing the bottom of the iceberg?
@FernandoWINSANTO5 ай бұрын
When there is fraud is 1 example how science ceases to be science.
@FernandoWINSANTO5 ай бұрын
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 ....
@EugeneKhutoryansky5 ай бұрын
Bribery in scientific journals is horrible. But, what percentage of reputable scientists would accept a bribe to promote a commercial product in a science video?
@titaniusanglesmith9690Ай бұрын
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.
@thku4grace6 ай бұрын
We just need to take science for what it is. Science is a consensus of view of many scientists and people that otherwise identify as scientists , who also happen to be horribly conflicted due to outside influences which pay them to claim studies which confirm propaganda as science while blackballing those that refuse to lose their integrity.
@lepidoptera93376 ай бұрын
Somebody needs to look up the definition of science, again... and again... and again. ;-)
@kiteinthesky93245 ай бұрын
Yeah, that's not what science is. Science is a methodology and a way of thinking, not academic consensus.
@Les5375 ай бұрын
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".
@iviewthetube6 ай бұрын
Scientists seem to be under a lot of duress to conform and to push approved narratives.
The idea that it might "become worse" seems to focus in an unfortunate way on perception, rather than reality. It is the exposure of existing corruption that will become worse, the corruption, bribery, censorship, in other anti-scientific behavior has been increasingly the norm for decades. If anything it's wonderful that it's becoming exposed now.
@TheBaumcm5 ай бұрын
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.
@TheBaumcm5 ай бұрын
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.
@KAZVorpal5 ай бұрын
@@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.
@KAZVorpal5 ай бұрын
@@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.
@rwbatopw6 ай бұрын
Very sad, but, in my opinion, part of a much larger problem. I suppose I'm so dated and old fashioned, that my opinion has little relevance, but it seems that greed, self-promotion, and shamelessness have become virtues over the past 40 years, while basic morality has disappeared. This is evident throughout society - not only in science. I did not stay in academic science, after finishing a PhD, as a result of observing really awful behaviors and lack of ethics as a grad student, but it's no better in corporate environments, law firms, and government.
@kuba2ve6 ай бұрын
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.
@mmotsenbocker5 ай бұрын
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.
@Alondro775 ай бұрын
@@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. >:}
@kuba2ve5 ай бұрын
@@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.
@AlexisOmnis5 ай бұрын
@@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.
@kurtiserikson73346 ай бұрын
Anytime financial incentives are involved in a system, there will always be some motivation for cheating. Seems like publishers should be financially penalized for not properly vetting papers before publishing them.
@tokenghost77776 ай бұрын
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.
@FredPlanatia6 ай бұрын
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.
@kurtiserikson73346 ай бұрын
@@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.
@GizzyDillespee6 ай бұрын
@@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.
@hawkgeoff6 ай бұрын
maybe we should punish those that are at fault of spouting bogus "science"... We could start with Anthony Fauci over here in the states.
@wwiiinplastic47126 ай бұрын
This has been going on for decades; it is already very bad.
@bearlemley6 ай бұрын
Dr. P. Boghossian’s ridicules (and hilarious) gag papers that got published in a liberalized journal, was a real eye-opener on the kind of crap that can be published by a biased publication.
@alieninmybeverage6 ай бұрын
Maybe we peaked at Wikipedia
@VerbDoesStuff6 ай бұрын
Well that’s depressing
@GeneralEase6 ай бұрын
its edited by athoritative sources its no different than the rest of the naritive.
@VerbDoesStuff6 ай бұрын
@@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.
@VerbDoesStuff6 ай бұрын
@@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.
@alexxx44346 ай бұрын
@@VerbDoesStuff I would argue that news hasn't been trustful already for quite some time even without any AI.
@greeneyesms6 ай бұрын
I'm trying to recall the major US newspaper that publishes a page 1 story to support its agenda then retracts/corrects it quietly on page 12 a week later. I think it's in New York.
@amicloud_yt6 ай бұрын
Oh it's a lot more than 1 paper from new york. :(
@andrewharrison84366 ай бұрын
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.
@macsnafu6 ай бұрын
That's a good point. The retraction/correction ought to be on the same page that the original story was on.
@chinookvalley6 ай бұрын
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.
@tonybernard44446 ай бұрын
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.
@byronwilliams79775 ай бұрын
Some folks have been publishing bs for ages. Great post.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
Who exactly? You forgot to provide any evidence!
@ColdHawk5 ай бұрын
I am sad to have watched all the promise of the Information Age sour into the cynicism demanded by the Manipulation Age. The golden dawn of an era with unsurpassed potential for collaboration and free exchange of knowledge has prematurely dimmed to the grim dusk of an era characterized by the constant con. I am trying to stay sad rather than becoming bitter. I remember my excitement as a student, sending an email from my university to another to ask the author of a paper questions about their research. By the end of the day, and a couple of email exchanges later, I’d received generously thoughtful replies and a table of data that their group had not included in their publications. I can still remember sitting in the computer lab feeling a kind of reverence and thinking, “this is like being alive to see the first printing presses turning out copies of a book; the internet is one of human kind’s greatest advances.” The possibilities were writ large. Today m however, who can trust the information that is shared?
@SloverOfTeuth6 ай бұрын
I've seen a lot of what amounts to corruption in environmental science, specifically in relation to producing work making predictions of the consequences and costs of sea level rise in regions. Making a set of predictions is forecasting not research, the forecasts depend on a lot of assumptions with lots of leeway to swing the results, forecasts are often subject to little or no effective peer review, and unsurprisingly their forecasts often support the views of those providing funding to them. Add to that the tendency to produce books of papers by invited authors and you have published "science" which is sometimes functionally indistinguishable from propaganda. Unfortunately one sees non-profits engage heavily in this as their core business model.
@severpop86996 ай бұрын
non - profits my arse... lol
@robinhood46406 ай бұрын
In the past we had crystal balls, I'm wondering if we shouldn't go back to using them.
@conradgittins44766 ай бұрын
The change to short term contracts over the last few decades is the culprit. The pressure to publish is so great now that more researchers are willing to take risks and present papers of low standard or even fraudulent. In Australia we've had some mindboggling cases where good scientists have commited scientific misconduct. Some have even completely fabricated experiments in attempts to win grant funding. Lifetime tenure may have had its problems but now there is a serious problem with quality.
@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb78366 ай бұрын
"Publish or perish."
@Ken-er9cq6 ай бұрын
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
@ninakore6 ай бұрын
Which scientists?
@u2b836 ай бұрын
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
@RipMinner6 ай бұрын
We built are whole society around wealth and money. Then act surprised when money corrupts everything. I don’t know why. I’m never surprised to find corruption in any Institute.
@reekinronald67765 ай бұрын
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.
@quovadis50365 ай бұрын
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?
@TheLuminousOne5 ай бұрын
thats true, money and filthy finances literally corrupt everything, institutions, processes, minds, people
@royhammel52055 ай бұрын
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.
@realfetchboy5 ай бұрын
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?
@HazeCake6 ай бұрын
money as incentive, humanity will only degrade.
@sagmilling6 ай бұрын
As a peer reviewer for the major journal in my field, I don't run into too many of these faked papers, but I do run into a lot of researchers who can't get the basics of a technical paper right. What is a hypothesis, what is a null hypothesis, how to construct a method to test the both of them, and how to interpret the results.
@freshrot4206 ай бұрын
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.
@lwmarti6 ай бұрын
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...
@HellSpawn865 ай бұрын
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.
@michaelanderson21666 ай бұрын
This is why you should always question the science, not trust it.
@andrewmoeller21116 ай бұрын
Unless it has to do with some political agenda I agree with /s
@kenhickford65816 ай бұрын
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.
@marpsr6 ай бұрын
💯
@rm68576 ай бұрын
Especially global warming
@Nebukanezzer6 ай бұрын
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.
@bernieeod575 ай бұрын
Back in 1993, there was a book titled Galloeos revenge detailing junk science. Nothing new here
@Willowy135 ай бұрын
As a woman in the field (researching and teaching), the last 4 years have been brutal for my own faith in my field (Biotechnology). I don't think I need to say why right? I saw colleagues lie for ideology and money. Lie against things they told the world didn't work, but used privately. No shame. No thought for everyone else... and these people speak God's name when needed. Thanks to them, I lost colleagues from other fields that believed their words instead of mine when I work in the direct field related to IT and I refuted what was "common sense" during that time. Then, I am seeing people getting sick from the V for IT too. People that were dupped for believing my colleagues. The same colleagues that don't step into a lab regularly, but have their names in papers because they are powerful and everyone wants clout. Today, I don't want to do it anymore and I am thinking of leaving the fiield all together.😕😕
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
If anything you have claimed is true then why have you failed to name a single person involved?
@alexxx44346 ай бұрын
"Papers or bust" going on in academia could have only led to this.
@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb78366 ай бұрын
"Publish or perish" is the phrase.
@jwarmstrong6 ай бұрын
If the Chinese had to use paper to publish there would be no trees in China
@alexxx44346 ай бұрын
@@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb7836 Right. Couldn't quite remember it on the spot, so invented my own spin. Thanks for reminding.
@Sonny_McMacsson6 ай бұрын
@@alexxx4434 You mean it wasn't a joke derived from the "irritated word sequences" section of the video?
@jameshart26226 ай бұрын
@@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.
@SquizzMe6 ай бұрын
This issue runs way deeper than just "quantity over quality". There is plenty of politics involved here, the least of all people seeking promotions. Corporations trying to insulate their products from contrary research; political parties trying to falsely legitimize questionable public policy; biased scientists steeped in dogma trying to push their own precious ideologies. Science is not as 'objective' as people like to think it is.
@ILLUMINATED-16 ай бұрын
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.
@ska0426 ай бұрын
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...
@automatescellulaires85436 ай бұрын
@@ska042 Maybe the cause for publish or perish takes it roots into politics/profit-based-economy. Then both of you would be right.
@thesenamesaretaken6 ай бұрын
@@ska042it's my observation that people who accuse others of motivated reasoning usually have motivations for their reasoning 😎
@Pushing_Pixels6 ай бұрын
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.
@WickeD725 ай бұрын
“The first thing a man will do for his ideal is lie” ― Joseph Schumpeter
@Seevawonderloaf5 ай бұрын
As a biologist who worked in academia, I also want there to be coverage over abuses in science, especially of phds and post docs who often can’t leave without compromising their careers. I’ve seen people destroyed by the abuse and one friend of a friend even self-exited
@duncanny58486 ай бұрын
Sadly, lying is becoming the new default skill required by EVERY company/discipline/relationship. Honesty is just to hard, especially when you are the only one?
@ILLUMINATED-16 ай бұрын
If we made truth the goal, there wouldn't be so many problems. Unfortunately, not so.
@toxic_narcissist6 ай бұрын
You know what's also a problem? People who like over exaggerating like you
@ILLUMINATED-16 ай бұрын
@@toxic_narcissist? go away? what kind of nonsense reply is this
@zah9366 ай бұрын
Yep
@Freedom_Half_Off5 ай бұрын
@ILLUMINATED-1 well at least they told the truth in their name 😆
@mysteryman4806 ай бұрын
The problem is that the journal publishers care more about money than truth.
@hawkgeoff6 ай бұрын
Ding, ding, ding... winner. They system is broken. many "scientist" have become just as dirty as politicians.
@LadyHoneybee6 ай бұрын
The truth sets you free. But too many people don't want free: they want money.
@darylrichardson85675 ай бұрын
How was this not obvious? Seriously, they make bold claims & never Show Their Methodology. We know they’re openly biased. What makes you think their ‘studies’ can stand scrutiny.
@quite1enough6 ай бұрын
This is just scary...
@SwissPGO6 ай бұрын
About 8 years ago, as a lecturer, I detected fraud on a thesis, I brought it before the ethics committee where the fraud was confirmed, yet after a visit to st-petersburg of the academic director (the student was russian) the student passed and was given the best student price, and a few months later most people part of the ethics commission got sacked. This was a privately funded, yet regulated university.
@kareandersson6 ай бұрын
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.
@michaelstiller22826 ай бұрын
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.
@jfverboom79736 ай бұрын
@@kareanderssonTruth is not THAT relative.
@erinm94456 ай бұрын
Yikes. That sounds like it might not have been politics as much as outright blackmail or extortion.
@jannikheidemann38056 ай бұрын
@@kareandersson Truth isn't relative, it's just not affordable to the average household.
@travisporco6 ай бұрын
Anyone who publishes fake data needs to be drummed out of science once and for all. Trust is key; once violated, there is no good way to restore it.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
Absolutely. The elephant on this thread is that so few people ever provided any valid and verified evidence for their claims and conspiracy theories.
@Bob_Adkins5 ай бұрын
The present is not a good time for dedicated scientists. It's like the return of the dark ages.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
@@Bob_Adkins Where is your evidence, because you have provided none?
@Bob_Adkins5 ай бұрын
@@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
@Bob_Adkins5 ай бұрын
@@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.
@CCP-Lies5 ай бұрын
Politics and corporations has ruined medicine and scientific discoveries
@ferdinandgoodfellow74165 ай бұрын
Hi Sabine, A related problem is when journals are controlled by scientists with a particular viewpoint who then suppressed dissenting viewpoints. This is problem is especially evident in climate science. Read Andrew Montford's books for examples. For example, Michael Mann's famous hockey stick paper, upon auditing, proved to be riddled with errors and worse.
@Dave3Dman6 ай бұрын
"Trust THE Science!"
@DavidTamang6 ай бұрын
Raw data files and measurement parameters should be provided with manuscripts for publication. This would solve the problem in many instances and allow for better scrutiny of the results.
6 ай бұрын
+1
@joshua432146 ай бұрын
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.
@bentuovila52966 ай бұрын
Anyone that had their peer grade their work in school should understand how good peer review can be.
@Scootphoria6 ай бұрын
Kinda like our U.S. senator that says there's science that proves reducing food production feeds more people. Just one example of many.....
@hugedabs58276 ай бұрын
It's been really bad for 30 years thanks for finally noticing
@Thomas-gk426 ай бұрын
Don´t you know her book "Lost in Math", published 2018? She describes the problem very accurately there.
@RS-ls7mm6 ай бұрын
A couple of internships while in college quickly removed any interest in pursuing physics as a career. All they did was beg for money.
@dmitripogosian50846 ай бұрын
Well, if you organize startup, you'll be begging investors for money as well.
@justliberty40726 ай бұрын
@@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.
@ColinMill16 ай бұрын
I chose to do a PhD in cloud microphysics in the mid 1970s and was appointed lecturer in 1980. Given the position cloud physics (as the "indirect aerosol effect") holds in climate science this should have been the dream career but i resigned in the mid 90s with great relief. The current problems in science have been a long time coming and were entirely foreseeable.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
Where is your evidence for your claims? You forgot to provide any whatsoever.
@Caleb-qr6lo6 ай бұрын
Situations like this and the echo chamber that peer review can create is why many people don’t “trust the science” anymore.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
Situations like what? You forgot to say or provide any evidence for anything you claimed.
@philiphumphrey15486 ай бұрын
I think it was ever so. In my career I sometimes reproduced experiments in published papers and they didn't do what the paper claimed. I always put it down to either the author's incompetence or mine, but could have been falsified results. Even years ago there was so much pressure on academics to publish or lose funding that a lot of dross got published and survived peer review. The only real test is independently reproducing the results.
@SkorjOlafsen6 ай бұрын
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.
@Erowens986 ай бұрын
@@SkorjOlafsenthe more people involved the harder it is to keep the secret though.
@ILLUMINATED-16 ай бұрын
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.
@memo_b_random19786 ай бұрын
Disappointing one’s audience or family is bad, but it’s the kidney disappointment that can be life-ending.
@dave_sic13655 ай бұрын
Lets just hope they dont bury the victims near a subterrainian insect province.
@yesfredfredburger80085 ай бұрын
This is good news! Corruption has been growing for years. It’s time for honest conversations to proliferate
@brkbtjunkie5 ай бұрын
I lost faith in the institution of science a long time ago when soda companies got papers published that claimed soda is good for you.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
Where is your evidence? You forgot to provide any!
@cassieoz17026 ай бұрын
Is it getting worse are we just getting more suspicious and looking deeper? My field is nutrition 'science' and while fraud is one issue, the appalling quality of published papers, deeply influenced by industry funding, going back seventy years years is an indictment to both scientists, 'peer reviewers' AND publishers. Worryingly, this has has influenced community advice/guidance with catastrophic results.
@ericrawson29095 ай бұрын
I just watched a video about an excellent paper that was retracted. Full of inconvenient truth about the harms of a procedure we all had our arms twisted to take in recent years. Harm covered up, profits ongoing.
@michaelrains642955 ай бұрын
And most importantly for them, consequences avoided as tens of thousands expire.
@cherubin7th6 ай бұрын
Much worse are the papers that write something that a journal wants to see.
@craigslist69886 ай бұрын
what's rising isn't bribes, it's awareness of the corrupt publishing system bribes 😂
@Gunni19726 ай бұрын
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.
@jwarmstrong6 ай бұрын
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 -
@amihartz6 ай бұрын
don't worry, the free market will figure it out ;)
@Costa_Conn6 ай бұрын
It's a direct result of emphasis of number of publications, rather than quality in grant applications and promotion.
@emergentform11886 ай бұрын
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.
@superspeeder6 ай бұрын
Useless drugs like IV? How about papers published to make absolutely useful drugs appear useless in specific applications in order to justify the use of shiny new drugs?
@wngimageanddesign95466 ай бұрын
Bingo! Ivermectin is a known safe and successful drug.
@superspeeder6 ай бұрын
@@wngimageanddesign9546 when doctors are having their practices threatened for prescribing it, you KNOW something’s up.
@barneyronnie6 ай бұрын
This is not as common in mathematics; all assertions/ theorems must have a detailed proof that is beyond reproach. A few errors in proofs do occasionally slip past referees, but are eventually corrected or refuted by a counterexample. I work in topological algebra and differential geometry.
@atillathehungry31456 ай бұрын
When an article starts with computer models PROVE, I know I have to take everything that follows with much salt.
@cricri70666 ай бұрын
A Himalayan rock salt lamp sized lump of salt.
@severpop86996 ай бұрын
and peper, lots of peper...
@knerduno59426 ай бұрын
Or, the science is settled!
@atillathehungry31456 ай бұрын
@@knerduno5942 With a computer model? You, my friend, have never designed a computer model.
@knerduno59426 ай бұрын
--Bill Nye the so-called "Science" Guy@@atillathehungry3145
@liamvickerman47456 ай бұрын
I cracked up at ‘breast peril’ and then the understatement of ‘kidney disappointment’ had me laughing a little too loud!
@str8up5985 ай бұрын
It has always been there.... Fraud
@davidespinosa191010 күн бұрын
It's standard practice for a group of scientists to form a "mutual admiration society" and give positive reviews to each others' papers and grant proposals.
@maplin0076 ай бұрын
Two former editors of medical journals like the lancet have said over 50% of published peer reviewed papers are rubbish.
@severpop86996 ай бұрын
and by over they ment... most...
@davidmackie34976 ай бұрын
I've been fighting against "publish for promotion" my entire career. Fortunately, I'm a U.S. civil servant, so it hasn't been "publish or perish" for me. Still, I've seen some people get ahead by publishing lots of garbage, and it is admittedly disheartening. There is some comfort for me that most of those frauds are now in management, which to me is a punishment despite the higher pay. However, other frauds are still in research, and have better support for their dubious work since they can be relied upon to pad the lab's publication numbers, making the frauds in management look good for the higher ups who only know how to count. On the bright side, most of my peers are honest, ethical, and talented. The frauds distress them also. There is hope for science, at least at my lab.
@Willowy135 ай бұрын
I submitted a paper to Phytomedicine. It followed the fields the journal accepted as well as the kind of research it accepted. The manuscript was returned because they told me I needed to do some new experiments as I should have contacted other groups to do them. I am putting it as simple as possible, but the letter was very disrespectful. The manuscript was not analyzed for its content. They decided I needed those exxperiments without looking the content. I lost the respect for the journal and later for Elsevier all together. I was a regular reviewer for some journals, including Nutrition and the Journal of Ethnopharmacology. Last year, I received a task and when I entered their system I was asked about my sex/ethnicity. I am a black Brazilian woman and I wrote them some nasties. What do the sex or enthnicity of someone have to do with a referee/reviewer job? Were they thinking of being "inclusive" in the reviewer process too, which should be blind to start with? Never heard of them and never saw thosee questions again.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
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?
@smallbluemachine6 ай бұрын
5:39 It doesn't matter what you use that for, it's old and safe.
6 ай бұрын
completely underscored comment. Mmh, what conclusion then follows for this video l wonder?
@ab-du6sw6 ай бұрын
This may have started 50 odd years ago when the 'publish or parish' rule was embraced by academia. It becomes really difficult to produce original papers/information when so much has already been produced.
@niblick6165 ай бұрын
‘Publish or parish’. Absolutely hilarious.
@edwardlee27946 ай бұрын
This is very very serious indeed. It may endanger the scientific and publishing community, worse it may sow seeds to destroy the publics confidence in science and other academic discipline. Hope something can be done to address this problem. Thanks dr. Sabina pointing out the issue. Your great work is greatly appreciated and keep up the good work.
@BeingFireRetardant6 ай бұрын
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.
@sfowler43885 ай бұрын
My Chinese friend offered to pay me (a native English speaker) if I would write her application essay to a graduate school in the UK. From the way she asked me I could tell there was nothing novel or particularly shameful about the idea. She's a super sweet person and I love her - it just made me realize some things like this might be affected by cultural ideas of both integrity and prestige. Yet even if it's less widespread here in the US, and even though it's considered more shameful here, I'm sure it happens more than we think.
@Abstract30305 ай бұрын
The problem has been worsened by politicians, big companies and grants. Each of those has enough influence to channel academic research depending on their objectives. For grants, there is no regulation what money should be spent on and researched. If for example one wants to show how dangerous AI is, or conversely how useful AI is, you will get results based on what the grant focuses on. ... and after a few years the academic consensus is there ready to be used. The Science (TM).
@user-cc5od3zk4p6 ай бұрын
I have learned an incredible amount from your channel, Sabine. Your channel is one of the worthy few.
@anthonymccarthy41646 ай бұрын
Reading the comments after listening to the video, it's clear that science can't do without something that science can't generate, the moral obligation to tell the truth and to follow through with its supposed methodology of actual and honest review and replication. If they don't do both then science will become increasingly discredited.
@yaimavol5 ай бұрын
What's new? The former editor of the NEJOM has stated she believed half the articles published in the journal are fraudulant.
@VegLuv5 ай бұрын
Rubbish publications were a problem 25 years ago. The University systems need to be torn down. In the meantime, the gods need more engineers.
@VegLuv5 ай бұрын
Just look at the plagarism outbreak that plagues the highest level of 'Murican universities. It's all a scam.
@andrewmurphy81546 ай бұрын
Re ivermectin, it would interesting to hear you talk with either Pierre Kory about his clinical experience with ivermectin or Alexander Marinos on his analysis of the shenanigans in the TOGETHER trial (such as arbitrarily limiting the dosage to patients over 90kg such that it slips below 400 mcg/kg for those with higher BMIs and therefore most at risk).
@jcjc57025 ай бұрын
she cant know everything gotta cope with being a vaxxtard
@Wuifgong5 ай бұрын
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.
@Hacker47485 ай бұрын
Let's not give any spotlight to liars.
@Loveportorchard6 ай бұрын
The one thing the world didn’t need was more efficient ways to spread lies and disinformation and more incentive to do so.
@adventureinc5175 ай бұрын
Many complain about corporate money in politics, but very few are even aware of the potentially even more dangerous problem of political money in science. It's a VERY serious problem!