Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #664185
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics |
| Subject | Science Fruad |
| Date | 2025-06-14 12:21 -0700 |
| Organization | The Starmaker Organization |
| Message-ID | <684DCBBF.7E29@ix.netcom.com> (permalink) |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
“Folks think that if it is published in a top peer-reviewed journal, therefore it must be true, ..." There is a sucker scientists born every minute. Only stupid people read 'Science Journals'. How Scientific Journals Became MAGA’s Latest Target Publications like Science and the New England Journal of Medicine have long been essential forums for new research. Now the Trump administration is accusing them of political bias, corporate influence and fraud. In April, the Justice Department sent letters to 15 of the country’s top science and medical journals inquiring about “fraud,” “political bias” and “censorship.” “You have a bunch of leftists who are sitting on big pots of money from pharma, and they all entertain each other and publish their friends,” McCabe said. “They were basically publishing lies.” “We’re probably going to stop publishing [the work of government scientists] in the Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA and those other journals because they’re all corrupt,” Publishing in peer-reviewed journals is crucial to advancing any scientist’s career, so researchers overwhelmingly pursue studies that have a strong chance of getting published. This demand has led to a proliferation of journals, many of them for-profit and sometimes of dubious quality. The number of articles published in science journals grew 47% between 2016 and 2022, from 1.92 million to 2.8 million, according to a study published in the journal Quantitative Social Sciences. That growth—and the vastly expanded reach of these journals online—has also been accompanied by increased attention to errors. Retraction Watch, a website that monitors journals and pushes for greater transparency, documented 41 retractions in scientific journals in 2000. Last year, the number was 5,128. Roughly two-thirds of those retractions are due to misconduct, typically fabricating or falsifying data or plagiarism. “Folks think that if it is published in a top peer-reviewed journal, therefore it must be true, ..." "Why should a small group of people be the gatekeepers of which research is read by most doctors in America?” https://www.wsj.com/science/how-scientific-journals-became-magas-latest-target-9874b6f7?mod=itp_wsj wanna place your paper in my Science Journal? i take payapl! https://twitter.com/Starmaker111/status/1166218593597444102/photo/1 If it is in my science journal it's all true! -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Science Fruad The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-06-14 12:21 -0700 Re: Science Fruad bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-06-16 07:40 +0000
csiph-web