We've already noted in a number of debunking threads how UFOlogists are using low quality journals to cover their naked search for more money. Unfortunately it's becoming a trend for other misinformation-based business models, making it ever harder to distinguish legitimate STEM research papers from bunk camouflaged in sciency clothing. I found this article courtesy of
Retraction Watch.
External Quote:
This isn't about individual bad actors anymore. We're witnessing the emergence of an
organised, systematic approach to scientific fraud. This includes
paper mills churning out formulaic research articles, brokerages guaranteeing publication for a fee and
predatory journals that bypass quality assurance entirely.
source (It's very short):
https://theconversation.com/how-bad-science-is-becoming-big-business-262821
This is an unfortunate issue that's been a thing for quite a while now but just now getting attention. China's been a great example of this going as far back as the 1980s. Not only do they lead research output now, they also lead retractions.
https://www.economist.com/china/2024/02/22/why-fake-research-is-rampant-in-china Lot of complex factors behind it.
I'd make a point that it being noticed "now" is because a lot of people didn't care for this or resisted information related to it, it's been covered quite a lot through the past few decades, just not with anywhere near as much attention. Of course, the tech to enable some of these issues is becoming wider-spread also, so, undoubtedly seeing increases in it too.
The China case is fascinating too w/r/t cognitive warfare discussions. We've not gotten specific examples of this yet but extrapolating on their theory and how they behave with other functional areas. Anyways, we "get" a lot of their research that surfaces onto the English internet, but most places aren't sitting there 24/7 scraping Chinese websites, nor is English-net a first priority for Chinese researchers in China. So, a lot of these retractions never actually get identified or retracted in our own sources.
China theoretically "enforces" against this some (same as fentanyl precursors) but as is the case with countless other areas they play games with, there is an interesting case to be made that they potentially allow these issues in part as a way to degrade our scientific institutions and their output.
To make a very critical note for covering this, this set of issues is entirely distinct from the more generically right claims about science being degraded in a more ideological sense. We shouldn't confuse those when discussing this/specific claims/potentials surrounding it. Not that you're doing it in the original post just for wider discussion note.
