3 tons
NV.
Senior Member
Joined: 03/13/2009
View Profile
 Offline
|
A purported University science fella recently claimed that there’s ‘no such thing’ as faked peer reviews (lol!!)..
Faked peer review papers (purchased via $$ grant monies) do a tremendous amount of damage by setting the sciences on the wrong track for untold decades…I just ran across this item on youtube, yet reports of these faked papers are often hard to come by (disclosed sometimes on Bing), being most often hidden by ‘the alphabet’ from the public eye…Thank goodness for the remaining ethical an honest Scientist who care about science and do their job for the right reasons!!
Under, ‘ Major Publisher Retracts 511 Peer Reviewed Scientific Articles’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-K3obvnKYQ
3 tons
|
BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
Quote:There were about 28,100 active scholarly peer-reviewed journals in mid 2012, collectively publishing about 1.8–1.9 million articles a year.
link
It’s not the existence of fraud I refute (the scientific community finds and reports these hence the retractions link); it’s the unsupported claim of the scale that I refute: 50% of government funded published studies were fraudulent.
Quote:Most academic R&D is funded by a few sources. The federal government has long been the largest funder and provided more than half (53%, or around $45 billion) of total funds in 2019.
link
You’d think with as much fraud as claimed there would be millions of publications that are bogus and thousands of PhDs awarded annually based upon fraudulent research.
Quote:In2020,thenumberofdoctoraterecipientsdeclinedto 55,283 (from 55,614 in 2019); this is the first drop since 2017.
link
With that many bogus published studies and bogus PhD scientists, science would never have been able to build upon past findings.
* This post was
last
edited 04/01/23 07:36pm by BCSnob *
View edit history
|
3 tons
NV.
Senior Member
Joined: 03/13/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
Okay, Feel free to ‘Say it ain’t so’…The ‘root problem’ is that as with most things related to human nature, virtue is paramount up until personal benefit enters the picture, thus, where do we go to find these select Angels who are exempt from compromise??…especially when in a ‘reciprocal sense’, some peers (as part of a closed loop system) often elevate fellow peers white papers to gain the prize of academic prestige…
On another note, we can all recall the anti-scientific mantra of “Don’t You Know it’s a Settled Science”!! - when by shear definition, 'real science' can never be settled, but you’d never know it by the lack of pushback from our cloistered (tenured class) Erudite Academicians, resulting in an abject repudiation of Aristotle’s invention called ‘the scientific method’…I suspect that part of this may be generational (I donno?), and part is that Universities compete ferociously for an infusion of Gov’t Grant moola $$ - the result is what defines ‘Outcome Based Science’ insilico-modeling (forecasting)…Respectfully, JMHO
3 tons - in RealVille
|
MDKMDK
Free(er), for now, until the next "variant"
Senior Member
Joined: 10/15/2008
View Profile
|
Since "science" is evidentiary based, no one can claim to be "science". It also implies testing theory against results of those tests. If the evidence doesn't confirm the theory, it cannot be true, nor a scientific absolute. I would suggest the covid vaccine "science" was flawed from the beginning, as were the generality claims, and is only getting worse, by actual downstream evidentiary data.
"Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
sci·ence
noun
noun: science
1.
the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained.
"the world of science and technology"
h
Similar:
branch of knowledge
area of study
discipline
field
a particular area of science.
plural noun: sciences
"veterinary science"
a systematically organized body of knowledge on a particular subject.
"the science of criminology"
Thanks for posting this, and your links.
Mike. Comments are anecdotal or personal opinions, and worth what you paid for them.
2018 (2017 Sprinter Cab Chassis) Navion24V + 2016 Wrangler JKU (sold @ ????)
2016 Sunstar 26HE, V10, 3V, 6 Speed (sold @ 4600 miles)
2002 Roadtrek C190P (sold @ 315,000kms)
|
BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
“Science” was used in the sense of the field of study would not have been able to build upon published studies and data if those had been bogus (not one person). When others try to replicate or use past studies that are bogus, their data do not match what was previously reported.
A YouTube report of 511 retracted papers hardly supports the conspiracy theory like missive above, nor does the 4 retracted papers per 10,000/year in the link I provided. Since you are in favor of providing evidence, where is it for your claim of 50% of government funded published studies (~25% of the published papers) are fraudulent. At ~450,000/year of bogus papers it should be easy to find the evidence.
Conspiracy theories have a nice advantage, proving something doesn’t exist is difficult/impossible.
* This post was
edited 04/02/23 05:56am by BCSnob *
|
|
|
BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
MDKMDK wrote: I would suggest the covid vaccine "science" was flawed from the beginning, as were the generality claims, and is only getting worse, by actual downstream evidentiary data.
What is your definition of “vaccine”?
Do you expect equivalent immunity or more broad and longer duration of immunity than natural immunity provided by an infection?
|
3 tons
NV.
Senior Member
Joined: 03/13/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
BCSnob wrote:MDKMDK wrote: I would suggest the covid vaccine "science" was flawed from the beginning, as were the generality claims, and is only getting worse, by actual downstream evidentiary data.
What is your definition of “vaccine”?
Do you expect equivalent immunity or more broad and longer duration of immunity than natural immunity provided by an infection?
Well it seems to me that this boat has already left the dock!! ![[emoticon]](https://forums.motorhome.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/scratchead.gif "scratchead")
3tons
|
way2roll
Wilmington NC
Senior Member
Joined: 10/05/2018
View Profile
Offline
|
BCSnob wrote:MDKMDK wrote: I would suggest the covid vaccine "science" was flawed from the beginning, as were the generality claims, and is only getting worse, by actual downstream evidentiary data.
What is your definition of “vaccine”?
Do you expect equivalent immunity or more broad and longer duration of immunity than natural immunity provided by an infection?
Are you suggesting that Big Pharma companies don't purposely falsify "science", testing and conditioned results for profit? After all, Oxy was a miracle drug with no side effects or addicting characteristics - or so all their published material would have had you believe.
BC I know you mean well, but big pharma has done so much to erode confidence that I am not sure it will ever recover. Pharma is a massive profit model with all the greed and corruption that comes with it.
2023 FR Sunseeker 2400B MBS
|
Moderator
Tennessee
Moderator
Joined: 01/19/2004
View Profile
|
One more personal attack and this thread is history!!!!
|
MDKMDK
Free(er), for now, until the next "variant"
Senior Member
Joined: 10/15/2008
View Profile
|
Throwing water on "the campfire"?
It seems everyone has an opinion, fwiw.
No offense taken or intended.
btw, the conspiracy theory of today, may become the "see we told you so" of tomorrow. It has happened.
https://www.rd.com/list/conspiracy-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-true/
Big Pharma doesn't make money off of "cures".
|
|
|
