Ah, Melanie, I wished you lived closer so we could go have a beverage and talk about this.
It's awful.
One, but not the only, aspect of the problem is the commercialisation of universities, at least here in the US. Just one example. A major newspaper here in the US published an article based on a paper from a researcher at a well-respected university about using electrolysis to increase the ocean's ability to sequester carbon dioxide. As an electrochemist, I dug in. Long story short, it was garbage. The method would emit more carbon than it traps. Nevertheless, the researcher scored $27 million in funding from a social media billionaire's spouse's foundation. The same researcher has started, and closed, twelve carbon capture and storage companies in the last ten years. That's just a tiny in fraction of the billions of dollars available from fossil fuel companies and the federal government for anything carbon capture and storage related.
Money has unfortunately corrupted science.
It's hard being a scientist right now. Thanks for bringing this up.
Very well presented Melanie. For me, while he is not the last word, I consistently enjoy Sam Harris and his Podcast Making Sense. While it is a paid podcast, he frequently converts some of the material for free use and tags them as PSAs. His wrap on COVID I thought especially sensible. He never or at least very rarely sounds like I'm right and you are wrong. I appreciate the uncertainty mixed in with sensibility. You might enjoy at least the first ten minutes or so. https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/335-a-postmortem-on-my-response-to-covid
Thanks for raising this issue. As a journal editor and reviewer I have rarely rejected manuscripts outright but your impressions about submissions from some Chinese scientists echo my own. Russian submissions often lacked supportive data, and some came back to me totally unrevised after being heavily critiqued the first time.
This is really important information, Melanie -- and I'll admit I wasn't aware of the paper mills. I've gotten spam emails offering to publish my writing for a fee (no peer-review), but the idea of being able to pay someone to write it for me, that I've not seen. Thanks for bringing this to light.
Thank you for a rational look at something we need to know more about.
Ah, Melanie, I wished you lived closer so we could go have a beverage and talk about this.
It's awful.
One, but not the only, aspect of the problem is the commercialisation of universities, at least here in the US. Just one example. A major newspaper here in the US published an article based on a paper from a researcher at a well-respected university about using electrolysis to increase the ocean's ability to sequester carbon dioxide. As an electrochemist, I dug in. Long story short, it was garbage. The method would emit more carbon than it traps. Nevertheless, the researcher scored $27 million in funding from a social media billionaire's spouse's foundation. The same researcher has started, and closed, twelve carbon capture and storage companies in the last ten years. That's just a tiny in fraction of the billions of dollars available from fossil fuel companies and the federal government for anything carbon capture and storage related.
Money has unfortunately corrupted science.
It's hard being a scientist right now. Thanks for bringing this up.
Very well presented Melanie. For me, while he is not the last word, I consistently enjoy Sam Harris and his Podcast Making Sense. While it is a paid podcast, he frequently converts some of the material for free use and tags them as PSAs. His wrap on COVID I thought especially sensible. He never or at least very rarely sounds like I'm right and you are wrong. I appreciate the uncertainty mixed in with sensibility. You might enjoy at least the first ten minutes or so. https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/335-a-postmortem-on-my-response-to-covid
Thanks for raising this issue. As a journal editor and reviewer I have rarely rejected manuscripts outright but your impressions about submissions from some Chinese scientists echo my own. Russian submissions often lacked supportive data, and some came back to me totally unrevised after being heavily critiqued the first time.
This is really important information, Melanie -- and I'll admit I wasn't aware of the paper mills. I've gotten spam emails offering to publish my writing for a fee (no peer-review), but the idea of being able to pay someone to write it for me, that I've not seen. Thanks for bringing this to light.