Not like it is real news in the sense of something those with a triple digit IQ and an open eye have not already noticed.

Continue reading

Modern science is heavily dependent on all kind of equipment and thus in extension money which makes the man of science dependent on those willing to pay for his research. You get what you pay for and you do not pay for something which you do not want - well at least as long as one is given a choice! And just like the control of the money, the control of science continuously tightens and has done so for a long time and in many areas, those touching the political or economical interests of those with the money, we already see what many call “one party science”. Certain subjects are simple taboo, in history you better not touch the holocaust and many other subjects, in biology and related topics everything related to racial difference is taboo, in medicine everything that could reduce the income of the pharma mafia, and in economics the true nature of our economic system and the range of consequences caused by its never ending need for growth are out of the question for those who want to keep their jobs and funding. And those are just four examples of many many more!

I btw would not believe the numbers in this survey, the roughly 9% given are probably closer to the percentage of honest scientists left in this rotten establishment than to the actual numbers of cases of misconduct observed by the surveyed scientists (read intellectual prostitutes)

Source

__________________
In times of universal deceit the love of truth becomes the most radical of all ideologies.

Still a Caveman? - Your Mind is Controlled - The Brainwashing of the West - Your thoughts are not your own

Veritax Vox Liberabit

Sounds to me like it's still relatively low.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Accounted for in all forms of research. Standard deviations are factored into the equation. To suggest that this is a "US scientist" phenomenon is irresponsible.

And here after getting halfway actually I thought you'd started a thread that would in now way relate to holocaust denial.....

At first I was a bit skeptical of that number. I'm in electrophysics. And if I fudged something it'd only be a matter of time before I had to pay the piper.

But yeah, history, economics, psychology, eugenics. These things are difficult if not impossible to falsify, especially if it's a small detail.

Racial differences are discussed in science. Though I'll admit the phrasing has to be....careful.

You're talking about corruption and the frailty of the human form.

And this exists across all walks of life and in all societies.

I would expect that the level of corruption in the scientific community (especially in the hard sciences like physics, engineering, chemistry etc) is less than the general community because if the nature of the work.

Namely, reproducibility and repeatibility demands must be met as well a sound peer reviewed process which should weed out many falsities and fabrications.

The more subjective endeavours in life are much harder to police and control.

Peer review is not he end all be all. Actually it is admittedly practically useless in the case of fraud. Peer review by nature assumes that he author is being honest. It is there to find errors not fabrications.

It’s a sad tale actually. In the beginning science was rife with fraud. So we came up with the royal society and in turn other scientific societies to root out frauds and encourage the sharing of ideas. Over time the societies became too exclusive and cumbersome so we moved onto journals and peer review. Ironically while peer review helped to lessen the problems with scientific societies it is by its very nature no defense against fraud. So we have come full circle.

I for one welcome the new age the internet is bringing. I see the journals loosing power by the day. In the give and take I look forward to replication once again becoming the scientific standard rather than publication. Its not perfect but it is a better system. Out with new in with the old.

__________________
Mens Sana in Corpore Sano