Have you ever noticed that there is “a study” to prove every point? Since covid we have learned, rather pointedly, that expertise is not all that it is cracked up to be. And there is a conundrum. It often takes expertise to uncover fraudulent expertise, so who do you believe?
By combining large-scale data analysis of scientific literature with case studies, the researchers led a deep investigation into scientific fraud. Although concerns around scientific misconduct typically focus on lone individuals, the Northwestern study instead uncovered sophisticated global networks of individuals and entities, which systematically work together to undermine the integrity of academic publishing.
The problem is so widespread that the publication of fraudulent science is outpacing the growth rate of legitimate scientific publications. The authors argue these findings should serve as a wake-up call to the scientific community, which needs to act before the public loses confidence in the scientific process.
This is mostly about the publication process. As it turns out there is money to be made in the scientific paper publication business and with the advent of digital publishing, people are finding new and unique ways to make that money without doing the work. The article is quite thorough and I don’t want to get into the tall grass here, but there are several points flowing from it that I want to follow up on.
For one, using scientific methodology to discover and combat fraudulent science is fraught with potential self-contradictions. From the perspective of the public it will look like a bunch of eggheads pointing fingers at each other and screaming “You’re not really a nerd!” – “NO! You’re not really a nerd.” We either need to produce a massively more scientifically literate public – or scientists need to learn how to better communicate and convince.
Secondly, this article does not address “agenda science.” Such is not science that is strictly fraudulent, but science that starts out to prove a point rather than ask the world what is happening. Here, for example, is “an expert” who has done “studies” that claims mankind will destroy itself through inattention to its most pressing problems which just happens to be climate change. Same issue, entirely different perspective, the DOI has come up with all new math and science to show that so-called green energy is just not that useful. The bigger the data set, the more you must question motive. More data, more statistics are necessary to analyze the data and statistical analysis typically involves providing assumptions – assumptions that can produce the desired result. Now, see the preceding paragraph and the article that opened this discussion. If you are not confused you ought to be.
Finally, and most importantly, the problems discussed here are not problems with science or the scientific method – they are problems with people. People engage in fraud for reasons of greed, self-aggrandizement, career advancement…your basic list of human desires. Agenda science places the agenda ahead of the science, again, an issue of base humanity. not science. Before we can solve the problems with science, we have to solve the problems with people.
This seems to be the case with most of the issues we face. Politics, science, economics… are consumed with problems, issues and scandals, all of which flow from the broken human heart. As a society we have largely rejected religion – the object of which is to heal the human heart – and presumed we are not broken. As we have done so, our problems have increased, not decreased. We keep trying to fix our systems and institutions when all that does is create new avenues for the broken human heart to act out. The time has come to face facts – we are the problem.
The time has come to work on us before we worry about our institutions and systems. We need religion, whether we think so or not.
