Elections Academic "Science" has been contaminated for a long time now in the US

[F1980]

Good video explaining how US academia is failing. Long story short, we can no longer trust what science says because they're just making up shit and having them peer reviewed to be approved and everyone else just accepts it as the truth. Data fraud is rampant.

 

[Natural Order]

Look up the replication crisis in science as a whole. Most people are completely oblivious.

 

[Mr Holmes]

I saw this in the news yesterday.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

Look up the replication crisis in science as a whole. Most people are completely oblivious.

yes, this is a huge problem. a lot of "science" these days is just bunk. it's unacceptable. i wonder what the source is. i would suspect a lot of it comes from social sciences that just make up conclusions to validate biases.

 

[F1980]

Yup. Do we really know if gravity is real?

You might want to jump off a building and make sure Big Gravity isn't lying to us.

What the fuck are you talking about? Why are you telling me to kill myself?

 

[rearnakedchoke]

Please. You have majority of the country wanting to teach creationism in schools, and don’t believe in evolution. These same morons are talking about science being made up.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I saw this in the news yesterday.

A guy was caught behaving badly and was appropriately punished for it, and that's supposed to be evidence that everyone does it and that we shouldn't believe anything that doesn't fit our preconceptions/biases?

 

[Rational Poster]

A guy was caught behaving badly and was appropriately punished for it, and that's supposed to be evidence that everyone does it and that we shouldn't believe anything that doesn't fit our preconceptions/biases?

Yes actually, I'm a centrist. Believe me.

 

[The XL]

Government and business being involved in the field of science was always going to cast doubt on what scientists and studies assert as fact.

 

[Scheme]

Read up on the replication crisis. It shows that about two thirds of studies are essentially worthless. It seems a large portion of academia is more interested in headlines that generate a lot of buzz than actually sticking to the scientific process. Getting put in a journal is more important than actually progressing our knowledge base. Who can blame them when scientists are often judged by quantity of citations and appearances in journals rather than quality of their research.

Psychology being the biggest culprit in my opinion, just a complete pseudoscience at this point.

 

[PhitePhan]

Read up on the replication crisis. It shows that about two thirds of studies are essentially worthless. It seems a large portion of academia is more interested in headlines that generate a lot of buzz than actually sticking to the scientific process. Getting put in a journal is more important than actually progressing our knowledge base. Who can blame them when scientists are often judged by quantity of citations and appearances in journals rather than quality of their research.

Psychology being the biggest culprit in my opinion, just a complete pseudoscience at this point.

Imagine what this means for the validity of studies that are further and further removed from objective evaluation, such as research reliant on modeling, proxies, epidemiology, etc.

Also, regarding psychology most serious people understand the inherent problems which make it is “soft science.” My concern is more so with medical science which is often almost equally flawed and subject to nearly insurmountable confounders, and the fact that the public has no idea and are susceptible to propaganda parading as “science” (as exemplified with the whole COVID debacle).

 

[ShadowRun]

Money makes the world go round

 

[Sinister]

What the fuck are you talking about? Why are you telling me to kill myself?

What proof do you have that it will kill you? And dont say "science" because that's all nonsense.

My Cousin's friend's Uncle's former roommate knew a guy who jumped off a building and got up and walked away with only a broken wrist. So obviously the science isnt certain on this.

 

[jx820]

It's not a good video IMO. It's sensationalized and misrepresents what happened.

At around 12:00 he says Kirkland and Ellis determined Marc Tessier Lavigne didn't do the manipulation and wasn't aware of it... 45 seconds later he calls the guy corrupt. If he wasn't aware, he wasn't corrupt. Ignorant maybe, but not corrupt. It's misleading to represent this guy as a villain profiteering on bad science because he didn't catch a lab tech photoshopping images 20 years ago.

The other thing about the video that was killing me is he doesn't really speak to whether the conclusions of the paper were incorrect or whether the findings were repeatable. Because a typical peer review (particularly in the early days of photoshop) doesn't match the level of scrutiny that a fraud investigator like Bik is willing to do, its totally understandable how people weren't looking for repeated patterns in the noise on the edge of the image. But if the science itself is bad, then the findings shouldn't be repeatable. So were they? Were they tested by others with new data? Who the fuck knows.. in nearly 15 minutes this clown shoe couldn't be bothered to say.

Lastly and perhaps most importantly, it may have taken a very long time, but these problems were discovered by a scientist reviewing them. That's literally the scientific method in action. It's proof that science works.

And to take an exception or a hundred exceptions and pretend it's actually the rule is nonsense. About 5 million academic papers are published every year. There will be some problems, from bad actors to bad methodology. That doesn't mean that "science is contaminated".

 

[Fluffernutter]

Good video explaining how US academia is failing. Long story short, we can no longer trust what science says because they're just making up shit and having them peer reviewed to be approved and everyone else just accepts it as the truth. Data fraud is rampant.

I saw this video today. Not sure why the algorithm suggested it to me, but I watched it as well.

Very interesting story.

- president of the university has his research looked into by an 18 freshman at his university.

- this led to falsified data, photoshopped data, etc.

- university president had to resign from his position, but will still be employed by the university.

- the same YouTuber did a video about a semi-famous study that was debunked out of Harvard. This particular study was widely reported in the news, now has to be retracted.

- within his video, he discussed that many assume this kind of behavior was limited to Soft Sciences, but this particular instance took place in the hard science of biology.

- it seemed quite a few in the comments section are in different science fields. One comment mentioned that in contemporary science journals, a researcher can select who he/she wants to be those that review the research. That's not unlike a baseball team selecting who will be the umpires for their game. Therefore, it reenforces the "boys club" mentally within science.

 

[Fluffernutter]

Please. You have majority of the country wanting to teach creationism in schools.

Any data behind that statement?

 

[Fluffernutter]

A guy was caught behaving badly and was appropriately punished for it, and that's supposed to be evidence that everyone does it and that we shouldn't believe anything that doesn't fit our preconceptions/biases?

I think the crux of the argument is that this was a guy that submitted flawed work. But, as a result of this work, he worked his way up the academic and corporate ladder. The truth didn't come to light until an 18 year old proof-read the guy's work years later.

If this highly respected scientist/academic can have flawed work lead to success and riches, does that make this an exception or is this the norm within the scientific community?

 

[Natural Order]

It's not a good video IMO. It's sensationalized and misrepresents what happened.

At around 12:00 he says Kirkland and Ellis determined Marc Tessier Lavigne didn't do the manipulation and wasn't aware of it... 45 seconds later he calls the guy corrupt. If he wasn't aware, he wasn't corrupt. Ignorant maybe, but not corrupt. It's misleading to represent this guy as a villain profiteering on bad science because he didn't catch a lab tech photoshopping images 20 years ago.

The other thing about the video that was killing me is he doesn't really speak to whether the conclusions of the paper were incorrect or whether the findings were repeatable. Because a typical peer review (particularly in the early days of photoshop) doesn't match the level of scrutiny that a fraud investigator like Bik is willing to do, its totally understandable how people weren't looking for repeated patterns in the noise on the edge of the image. But if the science itself is bad, then the findings shouldn't be repeatable. So were they? Were they tested by others with new data? Who the fuck knows.. in nearly 15 minutes this clown shoe couldn't be bothered to say.

Lastly and perhaps most importantly, it may have taken a very long time, but these problems were discovered by a scientist reviewing them. That's literally the scientific method in action. It's proof that science works.

And to take an exception or a hundred exceptions and pretend it's actually the rule is nonsense. About 5 million academic papers are published every year. There will be some problems, from bad actors to bad methodology. That doesn't mean that "science is contaminated".

You've missed a very key piece of information imo, and these are not the exception. Quite likely they are indeed the norm. Saturation has prevented proper vetting processes (this is the root of the replication crisis) to the point where nobody knows who is checking, and who is even attempting to recreate the science being claimed. This has been going on and increasing exponentially for the last 60 years. Obviously most of this problem resides in the medical science fields as that's where the money is. Maintenance of expertise is another key area we've failed as a species and will be a catalyst for societal collapse to be certain.

Science is most certainly contaminated.

 

[surgeyou1]

What the fuck are you talking about? Why are you telling me to kill myself?

Way to miss the point there, big dog.

 

[Sano]

You can do it well, or you can do it sloppily, and this is a case of the latter. He was cleared of fraud, but he was negligent and he stepped down. As it should be.

The scientific process definitely isn't perfect and there has been instances of misconduct, with substandard papers getting through the cracks. Scientists are aware of this and it's been written about extensively in the largest and most respected journals, including Nature. However to wholesale claim that science isn't valid or that all scientists are frauds is not serious. I personally know several people who's published a plethora of studies and they are some of the most transparent, hardworking and intelligent people out there. There's a lot of mechanisms in place to minimize bias and that trend is increasing, which is a good thing.

As someone who has myself submitted papers for review, you guys have no idea how ridiculously rigorous the process is and the amount of work it takes. Pre-trial protocols and analysis plans, guidelines that has to be followed, trials that have to be done, formats that have to be exact, ethic boards that have to approve, data that has to be handled in accordance with the law, conflict of interest statements that have to be signed, funding that has to be disclosed and that is before the review process which almost always results in revision. It takes several years of work. Add to that, there's hardly any money in it. The vast majority of scientists do it for the love of it, and in search of solutions that help people.