What percent of univeristy / scientific research is just totally made up? Dr. Gregg Semenza, Ranga P. Dias & others exposed

I started in the high-Tc superconducting field and it was so exciting in the late 80s with breakthroughs every week it seemed for a while. I 💯 % think that this group is massively incompetent or committed fraud. I would be delighted to be wrong as it would be a very important technological breakthrough.

However, I have also seen celebrated frauds and quacks proclaim cold fusion to be a reality. There were also some Italian scientists who failed to tighten a fiber optic cable properly and claimed to show superluminal communication. Also, we have the NASA group who claimed to grow bacteria that incorporated Arsenic into their DNA 😂

When you announce these discoveries in the press and haven’t passed muster with other scientists, then you’re generally not to be taken seriously.

I can't agree with you on this one "Universities are phenomenally corrupt entities where vast amounts of public money are wasted and there is close to zero accountability or transparency despite the theoretical existence of public rights of oversight e.g FOIA."

Also In academia, there are instances of misconduct that might not make headline news but still raise concerns. One example is the appropriation of ideas and text by lab directors and principal investigators from graduate students without proper attribution. This kind of behavior can be disheartening for students who often find it challenging to challenge such practices within the traditional academic hierarchy.
Moreover, a significant concern is the contradiction between the professed values of integrity, equity, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within academia and the reality of the situation. Some universities promote these principles under the guise of progressivism while simultaneously overlooking or concealing instances of civil rights violations. Institutions such as Michigan State, Penn State, UCLA, USC, LSU, Arizona, and Utah State have been associated with controversies involving integrity and equity. Despite the theoretical existence of oversight mechanisms like the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), there is often a lack of transparency and accountability, leaving questions about the use of public funds and governance.
For instance, attempting to access information through public records requests can reveal certain records being classified as "not subject to disclosure," ostensibly in the interest of the state. This situation highlights the challenges in holding universities accountable for their actions and decisions

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/flood-of-fake-science-forces-multiple-journal-closures/ar-BB1mmDKS

Medical doctors notoriously demand a lot of papers before trusting a new conclusion, and many sources (corrupt countries, etc.) are almost completely disregarded as untrustworthy.

In grievance studies it can't be reproduced since they're not really doing anything. If they just write "white man bad" or b!tch about patriarchy, straight white (and Asian too lol) men, rape culture in dog parks, etc it'll be accepted

From the WSJ article:

Fake studies have flooded the publishers of top scientific journals leading to thousands of retractions and millions of dollars in lost rcevenue. The biggest hit has come to Wiley, a 217-year-old publisher based in Hoboken, N.J., which Tuesday will announce that it is closing 19 journals, some of which were infected by large-scale research fraud.

In the past two years, Wiley has retracted more than 11,300 papers that appeared compromised, according to a spokesperson, and closed four journals. It isn’t alone: At least two other publishers have retracted hundreds of suspect papers each. Several others have pulled smaller clusters of bad papers.

Although this large-scale fraud represents a small percentage of submissions to journals, it threatens the legitimacy of the nearly $30 billion academic publishing industry and the credibility of science as a whole.

univeristy