‘Disruptive’ science has declined — and no one knows why
The proportion of publications that send a field in a new direction has plummeted over the last half-century.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230104165758/https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04577-5

Plenty of people know why but they were banned from publishing why

@shortstories

Pulling on that thread unravels a whole story around scientific corruption that eventually brings in ALL the conspiracy theories.

Epstein was just one of the players involved at a high level in the scientific community. It gets wilder than that.

@UncleIroh

My answer was going to be much more mellow than that

Focusing around getting University job positions based on how many articles you publish

And peer Review Journals being gatekeepers of orthodoxy

Plus an abandonment of the type of scientific method used by previous generations of scientists involving a mathematical model with predictable output for a specified input that can be tested replaced with statistical significance testing with no predicted output

@shortstories

Well sheeeit. If that's all your after then have a couple of free memes on me.

You could write a paper on Newton's tiddie cradle, I'll partner up. It'll be fun.

@UncleIroh

You could get that published in a peer reviewed journal with no actual research just pretend you collected the data from the research

Especially in a psychology or sociology journal

Say the people rated there satisfaction on a subjective scale of 1 to 10 then you did a two tail t-test with an alpha value of 0.05 and failed to reject the null hypothesis that they were the same

Only problem with getting it published is that failure to reject the null hypothesis gets published less