Trust The "Science"...That Just Retracted 11,000 "Peer Reviewed" Papers
It's yet another reminder of why blindly 'trusting the science' may not always be the best go-to move in the future.
217 year old Wiley science publisher has reportedly "peer reviewed" more than 11,000 papers that were determined to be fake without ever noticing. The papers were referred to as "naked gobbledygook sandwiches", Australian blogger Jo Nova wrote on her blog last week.
"It’s not just a scam, it’s an industry," she said. "Who knew, academic journals were a $30 billion dollar industry?"
...
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/trust-sciencethat-just-retracted-11000-peer-reviewed-papers
According to Nova's post, professional cheating services are employing AI to craft seemingly "original" academic papers by shuffling around words. For instance, terms like "breast cancer" morphed into "bosom peril," and a "naïve Bayes" classifier turns into "gullible Bayes."
I am watching and listening to the Town Hall in Red Deer on X and covering a lot of good questions and panelists. Over 10,000 watching.
I wish the media would honestly cover it but it will be slammed on talk shows and newspapers.
I noticed that our membership is growing so people must be mentioning this group around. Welcome.
We have a few regular posters, but anyone can post, so if you come across something especially worth passing on, please do.
For those who may be new or who have been here for a while and never posted our group enjoys articles and other posts that provide a unique perspective and challenge the common narratives, fill in blanks, or simply entertain.
Readers 'like' some articles more than others, but 'liking' to me is more a sign that we found the article useful than that we agree with it. I often 'like' articles that i thought to be are quirky, off-base, or just plain wrong, but worth reading.
