Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Topic

research fraud

Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
November 9, 2021
Categorized
Climate change, Intelligent Design, Medicine, Peer review
Tagged
,

From the world of “Trust the science… ”

Denyse O'Leary
November 9, 2021
Climate change, Intelligent Design, Medicine, Peer review
Reform is nearly impossible if the incentive structure remains as it is — rewarding publication in and of itself. On the other hand, nothing stays the same forever and growing public cynicism might provide a spur to reform. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
August 25, 2021
Categorized
Intelligent Design, Medicine
Tagged
, , ,

Medical science: “Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise?”

Denyse O'Leary
August 25, 2021
Intelligent Design, Medicine
Michael Cook: The gold standard for fraud is a Japanese researcher in anaesthetics, Yoshitaka Fujii, of Toho University. By the time he came unstuck about 10 years ago, he had published around 200 articles – and 183 of them have been retracted because he had falsified the data. “If someone can publish 183 fabricated trials,” said Roberts, “the problem is not with him, the problem is with the system.” Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
November 23, 2020
Categorized
Intelligent Design, Peer review, Philosophy, Science
Tagged
, , ,

Gizmodo asks experts to name the biggest science frauds of the past 50 years

Denyse O'Leary
November 23, 2020
Intelligent Design, Peer review, Philosophy, Science
Dr. Hesselmann's probably right but how depressing. In a world where so much research that doesn’t involve fraud fails replication, it’s just a fact that most published research papers in many fields are probably wrong or at least sloppy. So why bother with fraud? But not exactly a good look for science. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
November 21, 2019
Categorized
Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Peer review
Tagged
, , ,

Research fraud in China: The weak spot of totalitarianism?

Denyse O'Leary
November 21, 2019
Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Peer review
The central weakness of totalitarianism is that it exalts the powerful lie over the fact. But nature doesn’t reward that behavior. It may take a long or short time for the system to collapse (and other systems can collapse for other reasons). But the insistence that 2+2=5 if the Party says so is a lethal flaw. Read More ›