The Corruption of Peer Review Is Harming Scientific Credibility
The Corruption of Peer Review Is Harming Scientific Credibility - in the Wall Street Journal I discussed two serious issues in science; reproducibility and the flaws in peer review. I specifically noted the problems PNAS - the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the in-house organ of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences - and that they really had a bad year.
They published gibberish about female hurricane names and Facebook, but their problem did not start in 2014, I went back in time and showed how much taxpayer money had been wasted on EPA studies because a scientist got a paper hand-walked through peer review and thus into public policy discussions at the EPA, despite the fact that he showed no data. He simply had a friend in the Academy.
Getty Images.
This is at number one because shortly after article came out, the resulting controversy led to PNAS changing their policy so members can no longer get the work of their friends published without at least a pretense of peer review.
They published gibberish about female hurricane names and Facebook, but their problem did not start in 2014, I went back in time and showed how much taxpayer money had been wasted on EPA studies because a scientist got a paper hand-walked through peer review and thus into public policy discussions at the EPA, despite the fact that he showed no data. He simply had a friend in the Academy.
Getty Images.
This is at number one because shortly after article came out, the resulting controversy led to PNAS changing their policy so members can no longer get the work of their friends published without at least a pretense of peer review.
