Blog powered by Typepad

« Monitor me and die of boredom, why don't you?! | Main | 'Dear Lord, don't make me good, make me lucky!' »

Monday, 02 April 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ferric Fang ......

Where can I get one of these?

Hmm, from my personal experience the problem isn't a "hypercompetitive academic environment" it's the utter lack of it (as opposed to in the past). The current problem results from 'fashionable theories and ideologies'. So, as with warble gloaming, those employed by the 'reputable journals' (who subscribe to these beliefs) select only those 'scientists' (who also subscribe) to do peer reviews. (Peer review used to be a 'traumatic experience', to say the least. With every reviewer attempting assiduously to destroy and ridicule any work that anyone, not themselves, had the temerity to try and publish).

The result? Anything which fits with their ideology is published anything which refutes or even challenges it disappears into obscurity (occasionally published in other scientific disciplines, or some obscure foreign, journal).

As you say, it's fraud - but intentional and institutional.

Andra, his love bites are ferocious, so they say!

Alas, all too true, Able.

It’s a real problem and I don’t see a solution.

Funding attracts the wrong people and corrupts most of the others. Raise your voice in protest and you are out of a job. Take it just a little too far and your pension can go too. Much funding seems to be explicitly tied to existing policies which is a recipe for thinly-veiled fraud. So that’s what we get.

Remember that every time a crook works the system to get research grants that he didn't deserve, he becomes likelier to be promoted until he's in charge of the system.

I was feeling fairly cheerful until I read the last two comments!

The comments to this entry are closed.