Cheshire

@thatsregrettab1
123 Followers
91 Following
397 Posts

👉 Not a scientist, just a nuisance 👈
👉Mastodon is a backup for me now👈

Backstory: https://forbetterscience.com/2019/07/30/help-with-another-not-on-pubpeer-yet/

For Better Sciencehttps://forbetterscience.com/about/#:~:text=active%20on%20Twitter.-,cheshire,-Cheshire%20is%20again "Cheshire" rel="me"
Twitterhttps://twitter.com/Thatsregrettab1
PubPeerActinopolyspora biskrensis
Swedish investigation spoils Macchiarini cover-up at Lancet

NPOF, again and again: “Philipp Jungebluth and Paolo Macchiarini guilty of research misconduct” Lancet: “Paolo Macchiarini is not guilty of scientific misconduct”

For Better Science
Cheshire on Twitter

“Clinical trials recruiter and Covidiot @SabinehazanMD is proudly sharing a conference scheduling board, which includes other grifters: ☑️ Anti-aging ☑️ Hair loss ☑️ Nitric oxide nutrition(?!) ☑️ 💩”

Twitter

Two business days after I posted on PubPeer and notified the journal, the paper was retracted. Speedy!

https://twitter.com/Thatsregrettab1/status/1658573146872762369?s=20

Cheshire on Twitter

“Two business days from report to journal to posting of retraction. 🏆”

Twitter
The ‘Problematic Paper Screener’ https://www.irit.fr/~Guillaume.Cabanac/problematic-paper-screener flags unreliable passages in publications, supports a decentralised re-assessment of problematic papers, helps to decontaminate the scientific literature.
That's my research as member of the Institut Universitaire de France https://www.iufrance.fr/les-membres-de-liuf/membre/2427-guillaume-cabanac.html
🕵️ See this video portrait in French with English subtitles https://www.lemonde.fr/sciences/video/2022/08/01/guillaume-cabanac-depollueur-scientifique_6136822_1650684.html
Redirecting...

Daily screening of problematic papers found in the literature with tortured phrases or algorithmically generated text.

And then there's the survey they used to "validate" their hopeless instrument.

How would you respond if you received this from some random account?

As a misinformation researcher, I get all sorts of politically motivated harassment that looks a lot like this. Last thing I'm going to do is give them contacty information they could look up themselves for my university president, dean, HR people, etc.

To presume that not answering implies guilt is outrageous.

This week, Science published a stunningly irresponsible news story entitled "Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common" and claiming that upward of 30% of the scientific literature is fake.

https://www.science.org/content/article/fake-scientific-papers-are-alarmingly-common

Below, the first two paragraphs of the story.

Headline and intro notwithstanding, the story itself later notes that the detector doesn't actually work and flags nearly half of real papers as fake. Does the reporter just not understand that?

h/t @Hoch

Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common

But new tools show promise in tackling growing symptom of academia’s “publish or perish” culture

Schneider Shorts 5.05.2023 – Freedom and responsibility of the scientists

For Better Science
Schneider Shorts 21.04.2023 – So much work of high quality

For Better Science
The original sins of Leonard Guarente

For Better Science
Superconductive Fraud: The Sequel

For Better Science