Science Journals SHUTTING DOWN as They Lose all Credibility!

AI is just the tip of the iceberg. What did they think would happen when they started preaching with a straight face that biology is a social construct?
Intro/Outro by Walker Trips:
/ @walkertrips
Join the channel here:
/ @raginggoldeneagle
Join Locals here:
degenerateboomers.locals.com/
Also on Rumble:
rumble.com/c/RagingGoldenEagle
Back Blade Devil here:
www.indiegogo.com/projects/bl...
www.indiegogo.com/projects/si...
Twitch:
/ raginggoldeneagle
First 21 pages of Blade Devil:
/ 1402804553959952384
Blade Devil merch store!:
teespring.com/stores/blade-de...
Get your Blade Devil updates here:
/ sickfoxstudios
/ ragegoldeneagle
/ raginggoldeneagle
www.pixiv.net/member.php?id=1...
Background from Beast Tamer

[@plumaDshinigami]

Experts today are the ones paid the most to spread facts, but also the ones who know the least about those facts.

[@legiran9564]

"Experts" is media dog whistle for "Don't ask questions, just obey."

[@todf5230]

@@legiran9564 Always has been, and always will be. I had the pleasure of having a senior lecturer as my main teacher in primary school second half, he said "when someone brings out an expert to underline a point, be very wary". (edit) Best teacher i ever had, by far.

[@TiaraStarbrighter]

"paid the most to spread PROPAGANDA" fixed it for you! 😁

[@kittytrail]

​@@TiaraStarbrighter like that elizabeth bikxn00d guy. how surprising, eh! 🙄

[@aldaoroman]

NOTHING of value was lost.

[@orrorsaness5942]

Indeed! Manga Kyubey’s word has far more to worth than the “science 📰s”.

[@orrorsaness5942]

Just check out The Pensuke Files instead.

[@serpentinious7745]

The "mein kampf" paper wasn't part of the activist propaganda. It was a test paper, which are occasionally submitted to make sure that the peer review process hasn't been compromised. The journals were supposed to catch and reject it. Instead, they passed it and showered it with awards, thus thoroughly failing the test. At this point, the journals were supposed to course correct, but it turned out they were already too far gone. I was earning my bachelor's in psychology at the time, and seeing this was a major reason I chose not to pursue a career in psychology research. I don't have the connections or the stomach for playing that kind of politics, especially when it's already that far gone. I'll never forgive the activists for what they've done to the field.

[@warcheef]

I had a similar experience working on my M.A. thesis in political science. Unexpectedly one professor was actually honest with the thesis students and black-pilled me on the whole state of the academia. I think she was very bitter because she was literally the only professor specializing in and qualified to teach advanced qualitative research methods in a system where only quantitative methods are now acceptable and "relevant", so she told the truth about how only quantitative research in political science has any chance for publication, how researchers "adjust" their data to get the needed results, how almost all published papers are fraudulent due to the hypothesis being artificially retrofitted to fit the research results (because no "serious" publication would publish a negative result paper. Why? Because academics are too petty and proud to admit they could ever make a faulty assumption), and more. She also told us how the oh-so-great scientific community is full of pompous douchebags and people impossible to deal with due to how academia is a perfect environment for people with autism and social anxiety. I was already extremely concerned (because I was a qualitative researcher and had no interest in the pretending-to-solve-political-ideological-and-philosophical-issues-with-nonsensical-halfassed-mathematics-and-statistics which the quantitative research has become), but the last straw was that after I brought a genuinely interesting thesis proposal based on a completely new not written before hypothesis to my thesis advisor (the only specialist in the topic I chose at our faculty) he bluntly told me that he finds the idea rather boring and he won't accept it. He also said very clearly that it is way too early for me (a goddamn M.A. thesis student) to think for myself and come up with my own ideas, and I need to engage more with previous research before I am to think for myself. I quit the thesis track, quickly finished my M.A. with no thesis, and abandoned any plans for a PhD. Fuck the academia.

[@williamcothrum9199]

From what i remember the Kamph paper was one of 27 aubmittes by guys trolling, and of the 27, seven got accepted for further review, and three were publiahed ,and one given an award. Kamph was onw of the awven but could not go fuether, but for wrong reasons. "We like the passion but it is a bit too strong for what we are willing to publish" was their response for the White gene o side version of the book. The paper with an award? "How dog parks promote rape culture"

[@legiran9564]

"You must question everything . . . except muh science."

[@Cloud_Seeker]

More: “question everything apart from my BS”

[@txorimorea3869]

Is spelled soience.

[@Cyber-Rain]

Ironically, that is anti science.

[@legiran9564]

@@Cyber-Rain It is. But tell that to the commies who completely infiltrated and hijacked our academic institutions.

[@ceoatcrystalsoft4942]

Fraud is a felony. They need to charge these people for STEALING TAX PAYER DOLLARS.

[@DonVigaDeFierro]

"The science is settled" -Neil deGrasse Tyson, the Kim Kardashian of science.

[@JusticeforLiberty]

Hey pal , he is above any criticism. He is a diverse individual , so therefore, you are a bigot , regardless of how often he is proven wrong

[@AdonanS]

Indeed, I've noticed science has become rather sensationalist over the years, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson is one of the people at the head of it.

[@musicninja98]

​@@AdonanS Sensationalist and dogmatic.

[@walterroche8192]

Tyson is just like Sagan & Nye. Grifters with degrees.

[@AdonanS]

@@walterroche8192 I don't think they're grifters, but they spend too much time theory-crafting all the things we MIGHT be able to do in the future, and not enough time figuring out how to do those things.

[@MetaLord395]

Trust the soyence, they said. It's never wrong, they said. 😂🙄

[@LuigiTheMetal64]

Pressing against the throat bump will cause swallowing problems. The bump goes up and down, hurting the males.

[@cobinizer]

This simply shows that teachers are no longer relevant. AI can fail to teach our children anything useful for the cost of the electric bill.

[@todf5230]

It depends heavily on the childs\persons ability to think independently. And their ability to dig into what is spat back out vs. what they think they knew, blind belief is dangerous in all aspects.

[@ClockworkGearhead]

@@todf5230 That was always the case.

[@gloweye]

The entire point of peer reviewing is to not trust blindly. Good science isn't about trust, it's about double-checking. Anybody who tells you to TRUST, wants to sell you a lie.

[@IsmaelSantos-xv9qf]

Indeed. Science is based on scrutiny, second guessing, experimentation, repeat experiment to see if results check, alter slightly the experiment to see if results still check or how the changes affect results etc. Its all about Inquiry. Trust nobody and nothing, not even yourself, nothing is ever settled.

[@Raving_Rando]

In the science field nothing is supposed to be a sacred cow. Sadly, that is not the case.

[@OzixiThrill]

Not necessarily. Unfortunately, a lot of people don't really have a hint of skepticism in them, which means that they are susceptible to appeals to authority; And are themselves willing to push authority in the same way they had it pushed on them; Basically, not liars themselves, just people who have been fed a lie and are regurgitating it without thinking.

[@Pariatech]

It's over for the "WhErE's ThE sTuDy?! SoUrCe?!?" Bros.

[@ragalthor]

Any of the soyentific of the now revoked papers should be banned, exhibited and denied scholarships, funds and work on anything related to investigation and research.

[@todf5230]

And also a chargeback on whatever grants they recieved.

[@coffeelover7687]

They can go homeless for all I care.

[@walterroche8192]

Don't need a chargeback as it's a Federal crime in the US to steal from the gov.

[@contentsdiffer5958]

11K peer reviewed papers. All right, so the papers are removed. And, sure, the people behind them ought to be punished. What about the people that reviewed them? Should they not come under scrutiny?

[@killjoy197]

The names/colleges/ect of the people who's papers have gotten pulled for this should have their names published so they can be black listed and shamed.

[@philosopherkingzant2037]

The only skills you need to be an expert are lying, truth filtering, and biasing experiments And enter AI prompts

[@Dregomz02]

And don't forget about taking bribes in form of grants and also writing papers with a huge conflict of interest.

[@JoelLeonhart]

@@Dregomz02 Nepotism & greed in general as well? (also twisted corrupt version of "pride" tied in lies.)

[@user-qh6sg1dp1o]

Say what you want about James Lindsay, but the papers that he faked and submitted to these journals was really funny. Good riddance.

[@decwow]

Not only funny, but the papers they published were an effective trap.

[@wrongthinker843]

He literally tried to prove how fraudulent the whole process was and that money and ideology ruled over the facts.

[@thechuckjosechannel.2702]

They should've learned to Code. Now comes the part where we throw our heads back and laugh, ready? Ready! 😂

[@SuddenDeath507]

So the Lyle's suffering begins. 😀

[@WardenAzdron]

As someone learning to code, I cannot laugh. This hurts me.

[@darkshadowsaver]

😂

[@thelaughingmanofficial]

Any lie can be a fact if you pay enough money.

[@wrongthinker843]

Oy vey!

[@Oopsibwokeit]

I identify as a scientist with a PHD, now pay me money! 🤣

[@ThomB1031]

They could have, at any time over the last four years, just admitted they were wrong or bought off, and made a sincere effort to correct course.

[@DonVigaDeFierro]

But they are forced to lie or Hitler wins or something...

[@wallybiii]

Peer-reviewed author here to tell you that the process is in fact broken. If you're willing to spend time and money you can get anything published somewhere. Also I've seen my work plagiarized by foreign scientists in a paper that I was reviewing! When I called the authors out for plagiary, the editor still published the paper. My favorite though was a guy that published a paper titled "take me off your f'ing mailing list". That was the entire paper. Every sentence!

[@SkellyTonn]

[Bet most were pumped-up with gov't-funding with key-words focused on the hysteria period of the past few years! Welcome to 2024! Merit is re-asserting itself! Honestly tho, most of the fines are nothing compared to the stacks of cash stolen to produce bunk studies!🥃😑]

[@Thane36425]

Warping the research to fit agendas is part of, but that's just the tip of it. Scientific research has been shoddy for some time now. Usually this is altering results, massaging statitics, not reporting failures or tests that yielding results counter to those expected or desired. Likewise failures were also frequently not examined to see if there was a fault in methodology or test prep and execution. The result of these frauds was that bad papers got approved. These papers were then reviewed and cited by others, as a great deal of "research" is not original work but reading studies others have done and doing a "meta analysis" of these works. This means the faulty research gets buried a layer deep. Then the cycle as that study gets selected for another aggregate meta study. Those researchers will almost certainly not review all the studies mentioned in the studies they review, so the bad studies are buried another layer deep but are still generating bad results. This happens a lot. Just look at the Alzheimer's scandal and there are others. The psychology industry is notorious for this and that is with having most studies rejected at peer review.

[@haraldbredsdorff2699]

It is most of education. And it has probably been this way since education began, because it is a human problem. Turns out, most people do not think, they just repeat what others told them, without checking for them self. You have doctors giving opinions based on what they where told, not because they where paid, but because they never bother learn for themself. We used to have "4 out of 5 doctors recommend smocking for your health" and now they advice on medication.

[@wrongthinker843]

@@haraldbredsdorff2699 The 4/5 smoking was definitely due to tobacco industry money though

[@haraldbredsdorff2699]

@@wrongthinker843 It became that later. But they said it before too. Just like you have doctors claiming drinking red wine is good for the blood, at the same time as doctors say all wine should be avoided no matter what.

[@carlrood4457]

The real question is who are the "peers" doing the "reviewing*? Someone is essentially signing off to say," I read this and it's legitimate." I assume it's just a simple tit for tat situation." You 'review' mine and I'll 'review' yours." No one is actually reading anything.

[@Chibi1986]

How much you want to bet the you-know-whos use this to try and argue that they should control all AI development, and in turn, how 'The Message' gets around?

[@wrongthinker843]

You mean the nosy chews?

[@MartyrPandaGaming]

There's something the article just kind of glosses over. Not only were 11,000+ papers removed, but those same articles were cited by others. I'm sure a number of them cite each other, to an incestuous degree, but how many papers are still out there that also cite these 11,000?

[@emojimr4427]

I get all my Science from Bill Nye The Science Guy A REAL REALLY REAL Scientist THAT'S REAL👨🏻‍🔬

[@STB-jh7od]

Reminds me if 20+ yeats of Alzheimers research wasted on published/peer reviewed paper that was ONLY approved cause 2 women wrote it.

[@AlexBrown230]

You know what's funny? I used to be in the sciences, i loved science since i was a kid and was fascinated by it. I was a huge advocate of science and it's fact and empirical evidence based foundations which to me made it more solid since you had to prove X was true as irrevocable fact that establishing it as such. Now i'm sick and tired of arguing facts and evidence with people who move goalposts, i just don't care about science anymore, which sucks because of how much i used to love it. It's disappointing and heartbreaking to see what it has become

[@kni9ght]

Same, I grew up on popular science and me along with my uncle loved science fiction, these monsters have poisoned the well beyond repair

[@JoelLeonhart]

Same with me & with history as well...(Wish there ways to do "reverse Nostradamus" with actual ways to prove THIS HOW IT ACTUALLY WENT DOWN...) *sigh*

[@haraldbredsdorff2699]

It is because you where into it, you spot the mistakes. Turns out most scientists, just do what they are told, and never learn anything. Just like modern day librarians would burn down the library of Alexandria, if they are not allowed to add or remove one book.

[@DukeWooze]

The worst thing of all is that this could set humanity back because people will not trust it anymore. It angers me to no end.

[@wrongthinker843]

"Has become" Medical science has always had a fraud level of over 50%.

[@nickn1782]

Counterfeit consciousness is actually pretty good. I may use that.

[@wrongthinker843]

I just call them NPCs

[@joatmon6132]

No. It's "Trust the Soylents, Green, that is."

[@commissarcarr2463]

Surprise Government buying research Maybe for its own interest 😳😳 Research says bad so we need to Tax it or Regulate it or just Seize it. It’s for our own good. Science says so! 😂😂😂

[@Dregomz02]

Corrupt science going bankrupt is making my day

[@Hisu0]

Of course LLMs will make stuff up. Making stuff up is, unironically, their primary function. Incidentally, this is why creative labour is in no threat from AI - at least, until someone figures out how to make an analytical one, as opposed to current day synthetic types. All they can do is _compile the most likely continuation of your input,_ and that's literally it. They can't do ANYTHING else.

[@nobillismccaw7450]

Oh. They exist, but have extrapolated what happens if people notice them. *grin*

[@Vreguleift]

"Excuse me, have you been to COLLEGE? Do you have a COLLEGE education? My pap-pap paid for me to go to COLLEGE, so you should listen to what I have to say!"

[@refrigeratormagnet1680]

Gatekeeping turns out to be useful. Who woulda thought?

[@wrongthinker843]

Oh, you don't say? Passing politics for science doesn't sustain credibility?

[@Alondro77]

It took my lab YEARS to get a paper published. We studied the crap out of what we were researching, did multiple duplicate experiments... then did EXTRA experiments the reviewers wanted... and STILL reached the same conclusions... And then I see all these research papers somehow making it through despite being clearly BS on their face.

[@imaxinsertnounherex]

I gave up on Academia entirely by the time I was done with college.

[@meloelebi1996]

Like a lot of things there was always a 'incentivize the scientists by manipulating the funding' and 'lack of accountability once it was done' problem in journals. You could read it even when the scientists were in denial. Current activists just came in and made these problems infinitely worse. Then again, when a lot of these activist takeovers started with high academia, what do you expect?

[@LeeroyPorkins]

SAFARI JOE DOES IT AGAIN! - Safari Joe

[@williamdrum9899]

"JACKAROO" -Outback Al

[@DarkCT]

what really makes me laugh is that we already knew a bunch of papers were crap. but seriously, they couldn't have even been arsed to remove things like the AI prompts?! so lazy...

[@carlrood4457]

I remember in the early days of cell phones people were paranoid about radiation. Every six months or so, a "study" would come out saying, "We didn't find any evidence of.danger,but it needs more study." In other words, "Give us more money to publish our lack of findings."

[@DustinBarlow8P]

The entire point of "peer reviewed papers" is to to have the best minds assist each other to enpires breakthroughs and advancement. If somebody is just making shit up, it defeats the entire purpose. It's not like researchers get a ton of money or women, so what the hell is the point? Seems like a waste of time.

[@mgtowcowboy8159]

Tell 'em to all line up against the wall.

[@normangoldstuck8107]

Historically editors of medical journals and most of the editorial committee were elderly retired hard working men, almost exclusively, who had previously worked for many years in their specialty with great respect. Now the editors and committees on medical journal are young women mostly looking for an easy job where they can play on social media all day.

[@Jet-ij9zc]

Wait, so their "peer review" was just passi g it through a plagiarism automated test???

[@cobinizer]

Maybe Pol Pot had a point when he crossed all the intellectuals off the list.

[@Ziegfried82]

It always ends this way. The "intellectuals" are always shown be to abject idiots eventually. Oh sure they read a lot of books, talked a lot, bounced around a bunch of ideas but at the end of the day they were a detriment to society. That's why they get wiped out every time. The people who get upset about the culling of the intellectual class don't seem to grasp that it was the intellectuals themselves that pushed these insane communist movements in the first place! They lose control of the movement and end up targeted first. Oops!

[@ACSigma]

Sounds like the only way to counter this is for peer review boards to hire armies of actual human beings to actually read the damn things as part of the review process...but only if they can somehow avoid DEI hires.

[@GrandHeresiarch]

Was wondering when reality was going to catch up lol

[@dan8910100]

Their stock is way up, theyre allowing their previously published research to be used to train AI. $$$

[@Sukharno2121]

For those not familiar these journals cost a lot to access, with overpriced subscriptions and the option to buy specific papers for ten times the value of the subscription. The only work the editors have is sending e-mails between the authors and reviewers and formating it into a digital magazine. Colleges and government institutions pay for subscriptions to hundreds if not thousands of these things.

[@jamoecw]

None of the papers have been worth anything for decades, not not longer. AI finally cutting these down is a good thing, but so far overdue as to not be something worth applauding.

[@NorseGraphic]

I have a theoretical degree in physics…

[@caalsigo]

Fantastic :) I wonder how FONV runs now

[@DukeWooze]

Most history is probably bunk too.

[@shophet125]

They removed OVER 9OOO papers!

[@0giwan]

Look at historiography. Yes, there can be a difference of opinion, but it can only go so far until it violates history. Replace "history" with whatever science that you can prove through experimentation. Then, leave me the F alone.

[@christophebedouret9813]

Ha... Ha... Ha... I'm gonna... I'm gonna sooyence... I'm sooyencing... HAAAAaaaaaaaa....

[@BonannoCM]

Why should they care? They got to publish their dogma as fact into once-respectable organizations and countless peer-reviewed published articles treated like absolute truth for decades. It will take a couple generations to extract the last hidden true believers from classrooms of higher learning worldwide.

[@ryuramen84]

Once they started saying trans women can be women, just flies in the face of matter-of-fact reality. I believe they lost it (credibility) in 2019.

[@randomprotag9329]

The main failure is missing the blatent ones. Sometimes its harder to spot some research paper fruad but the stupid phases should have been caught and imeadately get it flagged

[@Phobos11]

Follow the soyience. Trust the soyentists. And this is what you get

[@nicholascanada3123]

Ive knew this for many years

[@williamkeogh710]

Anybody remember Piltdown Man? I do.

[@gfodale]

AI = Advanced Idiocy. Especially those who use and rely on it.

[@---us7qf]

Hahahahaha! Muahahahahaha! Bwahahahahahahahaha!

[@AdonanS]

Sounds like they might have gotten away with it if A.I. wasn't crippled by the stupidity of its teachers/creators. Bosom peril, really?

[@Teixas666]

what do you expect of " counterfeit consciousnesses"? :V

[@robm8947]

I agree with sentiment but why make it about culture wars? The problem derives almost entirely from Chinese and other non-English speaking STEM researchers, not western liberal arts campaigners.

[@user-ly1rc4qu4d]

but trans women are still women... right!??😨 (😂)

[@anthoymcgibson4128]

Where do I go for science?

[@nickst0ne]

C'mon, Eagle! You're throwing baby with the bath water. Of course some assholes and some activists deliberately corrupt science to fit their personal goals. And some fields are a swamp to be cleaned, like sociology, anthropology, psychology, and grievance studies. But science as a whole is a process. A damn good process when people don't cut corners.

[@kangaroomaniac9732]

Spot on.

[@Teixas666]

2:50 the fact this is somethnig that actually happened will never not be funny to me, more so considering there were people defending it proving that they dont read anything past the headlines.

[@fraterseeker]

Blade Devil book II when, RGE? You're already two months past your stated delivery date, and are on the fast track to another campaign 1 debacle. Get your shit together, man.

[@SarmonOflynn]

I love your stuff man, but calling it soy-ience over and over ain't it. Once would have been funny; 17 or 18 times is more like a kid who just heard a new swear word from his uncle.

[@mgatelabs]

I got an email to peer review something, and I ignored it. I did setup that system 16 years ago, back in school, but I don’t have time to read.