I started becoming extremely skeptical of peer review when my employer published what was effectively a press release for one of our products in a scientific journal. One of the "co-authors" was someone I worked closely with, and I don't think a single word could actually be attributed to him; he just signed off on it.
Obviously there's good papers and bad papers, but that was the most egregious violation of the notions of scientific integrity I was taught that I had seen to date. And it's only gotten worse since.
I knew something was up when I saw how much money wasn't going to the standard college classes. Anthropology, archaeology, History and other departments have been slowly closed down till many universities don't even have them anymore.
I started becoming extremely skeptical of peer review when my employer published what was effectively a press release for one of our products in a scientific journal. One of the "co-authors" was someone I worked closely with, and I don't think a single word could actually be attributed to him; he just signed off on it.
Obviously there's good papers and bad papers, but that was the most egregious violation of the notions of scientific integrity I was taught that I had seen to date. And it's only gotten worse since.
I knew something was up when I saw how much money wasn't going to the standard college classes. Anthropology, archaeology, History and other departments have been slowly closed down till many universities don't even have them anymore.
History has a reactionary bias.
Which is why I seek employment elsewhere. Don't want to be considered a reactionary for knowing history.