Flood of Fake Science Forces Multiple Journal Closures

[PeteS in CA]

Flood of Fake Science Forces Multiple Journal Closures

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/flood-of-fake-science-forces-multiple-journal-closures/ar-BB1mmDKS

Fake studies have flooded the publishers of top scientific journals leading to thousands of retractions and millions of dollars in lost revenue. The biggest hit has come to Wiley, a 217-year-old publisher based in Hoboken, N.J., which Tuesday will announce that it is closing 19 journals, some of which were infected by large-scale research fraud.

In the past two years, Wiley has retracted more than 11,300 papers that appeared compromised, according to a spokesperson, and closed four journals. It isn’t alone: At least two other publishers have retracted hundreds of suspect papers each. Several others have pulled smaller clusters of bad papers.

Although this large-scale fraud represents a small percentage of submissions to journals, it threatens the legitimacy of the nearly $30 billion academic publishing industry and the credibility of science as a whole.

The discovery of nearly 900 fraudulent papers in 2022 at IOP Publishing, a physical sciences publisher, was a turning point for the nonprofit. “That really crystallized for us, everybody internally, everybody involved with the business,” said Kim Eggleton, head of peer review and research integrity at the publisher. “This is a real threat.”

Which is the greater scandal, that scientists readily lie to get grants and get published or that peer-review has devolved into a this-is-consistent-with-what-I-want-to-believe back-slapping-circle echo chamber.

I will say, though, that I frequently "test" Ohm's and Watt's Laws and "verify" the First Law of Thermodynamics, .

[Fishrrman]

As I posted yesterday:
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,532107.msg3017435.html#msg3017435

[Smokin Joe]

There are a solid 30 years and counting of poorly conducted studies that form the foundations for the current climate panic.

To remove reference to that nonsense would require the elimination of not only the bad papers, but entire libraries of popular science (not capitalized on purpose) and fiction, from such notable and 'preeminent' publications as National Geographic. To purge the nonsense would require a Herculean effort. Even just going back and putting corrective statements in print, film, and other media would take a generation, it is that entrenched.

But before I celebrate, I have to ask what, specifically has been retracted. It might be that this is nothing but a purge to support the alleged consensus.