The hottest Scientific Integrity Substack posts right now

Climate research and policy are still heavily based on outdated and misleading scenarios like RCP8.5, which are causing a disconnect from reality and hindering progress.
Studies in various fields can continue to gain momentum, even if they are based on flawed or outdated foundations, leading to a waste of resources and efforts.
There is a pressing need for a significant reset in climate research to address the widespread usage of obsolete scenarios like RCP8.5, despite the acknowledged divergence from real-world data.

Study claimed hearing aids could reduce death rate by 24%, which is unexpected.
Critics pointed out issues like imbalanced groups and unmeasured differences in the study.
This study highlights problems with incentives in science research and publication.

Climate change models have not accurately predicted outcomes despite drastic measures being proposed.
Temperature readings used to support climate change claims may be inaccurate due to biases in monitoring stations.
There is skepticism around the credibility of climate scientists and their data collection methods.

A whistleblower exposed corruption in peer review in climate science, leading to the retraction of a paper.
The process revealed how activist scientists influenced the publishing process behind the scenes.
The case highlights ongoing challenges in climate science and the politicization of scientific publishing.

Misinformation in climate science is a significant issue, especially due to outdated climate scenarios like RCP8.5 and RCP4.5.
Scientific integrity is crucial to uphold in producing accurate information for policy-making.
Financial conflicts of interest can complicate expertise, leading to the perpetuation of misinformation.

Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity: