The Scam of "Studies"

[Bricktop]

Recently, I was debating (as usual) someone at the opposite end of the political spectrum to myself, whom I shall refer to as "X".



During heated dialogue, X remarked that they could look up "studies" in support of their viewpoint.



This brought to mind the issue of "studies", and how academia and publishing houses are committing a massive fraud on the community.



Firstly, we must ask how reliable are studies in the first instance. Academia is heavily populated by the Left, as we have recently and emphatically been reminded, in the US and elsewhere. Studies in areas such as sociology and the humanities carried out by Leftists cannot be relied upon to be objective...even if the author BELIEVES their work is free from deliberate bias.



We see the same phenomenon in the issue of climate change. "Studies" by left leaning scientist follow a doctrine; that is that the science is irrefutable.



No science is EVER irrefutable. But these climate alarmists become so entrenched in their religious fervour, that NO reliability can be placed on their objectivity.



But worse still, the issue of peer review has become utterly corrupted, to the extent that it is totally fraudulent. Publishing companies offering peer reviews of papers prior to publishing are simply whitewashing submissions to make a buck.



http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/academic-publishing-slammed-by-scams-20131122-2xzxs.html">//http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/academic-publishing-slammed-by-scams-20131122-2xzxs.html



This article clearly shows that many "studies" have been promulgated and validated by utter deceit. No peer review. No validation.



So, when a lefty stands up in a debate and waves a "study" in the air, you are entitled to be at best leery, and at worst skeptical. The use of "studies" has become a tool of deception.



What makes things worse is that to actually read a study and check the facts for yourself will take weeks, or months...even if you could follow the doggerel, hyperbole and chest puffing verbosity.



What is also interesting is that it is comparable to the "fake news" strategy of leftist media organisations.



Skepticism is becoming essential in determining truth.

[RW]

Politics is ^^^^^ that way.

[Bricktop]

1. You are not a mod.



2. What have academic studies got to do with politics? They cover a wide field of issues and topics.

[Anonymous]

It's true, that many studies arrive at a conclusion and work backwards. I prefer to look at the raw data and determine for myself how accurate the findings are.

[RW]

1. You are not a mod.



2. What have academic studies got to do with politics? They cover a wide field of issues and topics.

Read your post.  It's all about lefties.

[RW]

It's true, that many studies arrive at a conclusion and work backwards. I prefer to look at the raw data and determine for myself how accurate the findings are.

I'm not sure Brick realises that's an option and what thinking people do.  Every study I read, and I'm sure it's true for educated others, is read with a skeptical eye.

[Anonymous]

It's true, that many studies arrive at a conclusion and work backwards. I prefer to look at the raw data and determine for myself how accurate the findings are.

I'm not sure Brick realises that's an option and what thinking people do.  Every study I read, and I'm sure it's true for educated others, is read with a skeptical eye.

As it should be. But, I know the people who fund the studies often prefer we don't look too deeply.

[RW]

It's true, that many studies arrive at a conclusion and work backwards. I prefer to look at the raw data and determine for myself how accurate the findings are.

I'm not sure Brick realises that's an option and what thinking people do.  Every study I read, and I'm sure it's true for educated others, is read with a skeptical eye.

As it should be. But, I know the people who fund the studies often prefer we don't look too deeply.

Having done this kind of work, when the studies don't produce the desired outcome or conclusion, they don't publish the study.



A study not presenting its full data is also not worth reading.

[Bricktop]

It's true, that many studies arrive at a conclusion and work backwards. I prefer to look at the raw data and determine for myself how accurate the findings are.

I'm not sure Brick realises that's an option and what thinking people do.  Every study I read, and I'm sure it's true for educated others, is read with a skeptical eye.

That is an absurd proposition.



I repeat; peer review, that is a detailed analysis of the contents, data and conclusions, can take YEARS (read the report I've linked). How can ANY person review a "study" that is beyond their skill, knowledge, competency and understanding in order to make up their own mind?



Many "studies" are merely a control device for socio-politic or economic principles.



Studies should not only be PEER reviewed, but reviewed by a jury, so to speak, of common, everyday people.

[RW]

They are.  You can find things that criticize studies at every turn.



Peer review happens prior to publishing in peer reviewed journals BTW.

[Bricktop]

Did you READ the article that I referred to??



It makes the point that MANY journals do NOT actually review the published piece.

[RW]

Did you READ the article that I referred to??



It makes the point that MANY journals do NOT actually review the published piece.

That's why you read studies from the ones that do.



DERP.

[Bricktop]

HOW CAN YOU TELL WHICH IS WHICH???



DERP!

[RW]

Research.

[Renee]

Wow, it looks like someone here just discovered that most studies are little more than contrived piles of dreck, designed and conceived to push an agenda, product, or social theory. I thought by now that just about everyone was aware that "studies" where not real science and that the outcomes, more often than not, were manipulated, rarely scrutinized and highly suspect.



Old fucking news....I wonder if they can be any later in catching this train?.....