{"id":330187,"date":"2024-05-27T08:23:18","date_gmt":"2024-05-27T06:23:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=330187"},"modified":"2024-05-27T08:23:21","modified_gmt":"2024-05-27T06:23:21","slug":"so-much-for-peer-review-wiley-shuts-down-19-science-journals-and-retracts-11000-gobbledygook-papers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=330187","title":{"rendered":"So much for \u201cpeer review\u201d \u2014 Wiley shuts down 19 science journals and retracts 11,000 gobbledygook papers"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From JoNova <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Jo Nova<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Proving that unpaid anonymous review is worth every cent, the 217 year old Wiley science publisher \u201cpeer reviewed\u201d 11,300 papers that were fake, and didn\u2019t even notice. It\u2019s not just a scam, it\u2019s an industry. Naked \u201cgobbledygook sandwiches\u201d got past peer review, and the expert reviewers didn\u2019t so much as blink.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Big Government and Big Money has captured science and strangled it. The more money they pour in, the worse it gets. John Wiley and Sons is a US $2 billion dollar machine, but they got used by criminal gangs to launder fake \u201cscience\u201d as something real.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Things are so bad, fake scientists pay professional cheating services who use AI to create papers and torture the words so they look \u201coriginal\u201d. Thus a paper on  \u2018breast cancer\u2019 becomes a discovery about \u201cbosom peril\u201d and a \u2018na\u00efve Bayes\u2019 classifier became a \u2018gullible Bayes\u2019. An ant colony was labeled an \u2018underground creepy crawly state\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And what do we make of the flag to clamor<\/em> ratio? Well, old fashioned scientists might call it \u2018signal to noise\u2019. The nonsense never ends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A \u2018random forest\u2019 is not always the same thing as an \u2018irregular backwoods\u2019 or an \u2018arbitrary timberland\u2019 \u2014 especially if you\u2019re writing a paper on machine learning and decision trees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The most shocking thing is that no human brain even ran a late-night Friday-eye over the words before they passed the hallowed peer review and entered the sacred halls of scientific literature. Even a wine-soaked third year undergrad on work experience would surely have raised an eyebrow when local average energy<\/em> became \u201cterritorial normal vitality\u201d. And when a random value<\/em> became an \u2018irregular esteem\u2019. Let me just generate some irregular esteem for you in Python?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If there was such a thing as scientific stand-up comedy, we could get plenty of material, not by asking ChatGPT to be funny, but by asking it to cheat. Where else could you talk about a mean square mistake?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wiley \u2014 a mega publisher of science articles has admitted that 19 journals are so worthless, thanks to potential fraud, that they have to close them down. And the industry is now developing AI tools to catch the AI fakes (makes you feel all warm inside?)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Flood of Fake Science Forces Multiple Journal Closures<\/a> tainted by fraud<\/a><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

EMIL LENDOF THE WALL STREET JOURNAL<\/em><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

By Nidhi Subbaraman, May 14, 2024<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Fake studies have flooded the publishers of top scientific journals, leading to thousands of retractions and millions of dollars in lost revenue. The biggest hit has come to Wiley<\/a>, a 217-year-old publisher based in Hoboken, N.J., which Tuesday will announce that it is closing 19 journals, some of which were infected by large-scale research fraud.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the past two years, Wiley has retracted more than 11,300 papers that appeared compromised, according to a spokesperson, and closed four journals. It isn\u2019t alone: At least two other publishers have retracted hundreds of suspect papers each. Several others have pulled smaller clusters of bad papers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although this large-scale fraud represents a small percentage of submissions to journals, it threatens the legitimacy of the nearly $30 billion academic publishing industry<\/a> and the credibility of science as a whole.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Scientific papers typically include citations that acknowledge work that informed the research, but the suspect papers included lists of irrelevant references. Multiple papers included technical-sounding passages inserted midway through, what Bishop called an \u201cAI gobbledygook sandwich<\/a>.\u201d Nearly identical contact emails in one cluster of studies<\/a> were all registered to a university in China where few if any of the authors were based. It appeared that all came from the same source.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of those tools, the \u201cProblematic Paper Screener,\u201d run by Guillaume Cabanac, a computer-science researcher<\/a> who studies scholarly publishing at the Universit\u00e9 Toulouse III-Paul Sabatier in France, scans the breadth of the published literature, some 130 million papers, looking for a range of red flags including \u201ctortured phrases<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cabanac and his colleagues realized that researchers who wanted to avoid plagiarism detectors had swapped out key scientific terms for synonyms from automatic text generators, leading to comically misfit phrases. \u201cBreast cancer\u201d became \u201cbosom peril\u201d; \u201cfluid dynamics\u201d became \u201cgooey stream\u201d; \u201cartificial intelligence\u201d became \u201ccounterfeit consciousness.\u201d The tool is publicly available.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Generative AI has just handed them a winning lottery ticket,\u201d Eggleton of IOP Publishing said. \u201cThey can do it really cheap, at scale, and the detection methods are not where we need them to be. I can only see that challenge increasing.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ABC in Australia even wrote about this, but only because it worries about the loss of public faith in its pet universities:<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

For the ABC, peer review is like the Bible, and universities are the Church. The public must believe!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So the ABC makes excuses\u2026 Oh! Those poor poor universities, forced to become billion dollar businesses selling defacto Australian-citizenships to children of rich Chinese families.  If only they got more money, their Vice Chancellors wouldn\u2019t have to make do with million dollar salaries, and punishing professors who pointed out fraud<\/a>, and they\u2019d have time to do research and prevent the fraud instead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wiley\u2019s \u2018fake science\u2019 scandal is just the latest chapter in a broader crisis of trust universities must address<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

By Linton Besser, ABC News<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

It [the Wiley debacle] also illustrates what is just another front in a much broader crisis of trust confronting universities and scientific institutions worldwide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For decades now, teaching standards and academic integrity have been under siege at universities<\/strong> which, bereft of public funding,<\/strong> have turned to the very lucrative business of selling degrees to international students.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Grappling with pupils whose English is inadequate, tertiary institutions have become accustomed to routine cheating and plagiarism scandals. Another fraud perfected by the internet age.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This infection \u2014 the commodification of scholarship, the industrialisation of cheating \u2014 has now spread to the heart of scientific, higher research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With careers defined by the lustre of their peer-reviewed titles, researchers the world over are under enormous pressure to publish.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Suffer the researchers who are forced to pay for fake papers just so they can \u201cdo their job\u201d? Sack the lot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ABC is part of the reason science is corrupt to the core. The ABC Science Unit is paid to hold junk-science\u2019s feet to the fire, instead it provides cover for the pagan witchcraft that passes for modern research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The rot at Wiley started decades ago, but it got caught when it spent US $298 million on an Egyptian publishing house called Hindawi. We could say we hope no babies were hurt by fake papers but we know bad science already kills people. What we need are not \u201cpeer reviewed\u201d papers but actual live face to face debate. Only when the best of both sides have to answer questions, with the data will we get real science:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In March, it revealed to the NYSE<\/a> a $US9 million ($13.5 million) plunge in research revenue after being forced to \u201cpause\u201d the publication of so-called \u201cspecial issue\u201d journals by its Hindawi imprint, which it had acquired<\/a> in 2021 for US$298 million ($450 million).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its statement noted the Hindawi program, which comprised some 250 journals, had been \u201csuspended temporarily due to the presence in certain special issues of compromised articles\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many of these suspect papers purported to be serious medical studies, including examinations of drug resistance<\/a> in newborns with pneumonia and the value of MRI scans in the diagnosis of early liver disease<\/a>. The journals involved included Disease Markers, BioMed Research International and Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The problem is only becoming more urgent. The recent explosion of artificial intelligence raises the stakes even further. A researcher at University College London recently found more than 1 per cent<\/a> of all scientific articles published last year, some 60,000 papers, were likely written by a computer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In some sectors, it\u2019s worse. Almost one out of every five computer science papers<\/a> published in the past four years may not have been written by humans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even if one in five computer science papers are written by computers, this is just the tip of the iceberg of the rot at the core of \u201cpeer reviewed research\u201d. The real rot is not the minor fraudsters making papers that no one reads to pad out their curriculum vitae. It\u2019s the institutional parasites taking billions from taxpayers to create modeled garbage to justify the theft of trillions. But that\u2019s another story.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

PS: Who knew, academic journals were a $30 billion dollar industry?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

h\/t SharperinOz<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Proving that unpaid anonymous review is worth every cent, the 217 year old Wiley science publisher \u201cpeer reviewed\u201d 11,300 papers that were fake, and didn\u2019t even notice. It\u2019s not just a scam, it\u2019s an industry. Naked \u201cgobbledygook sandwiches\u201d got past peer review, and the expert reviewers didn\u2019t so much as blink.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":330190,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818055,691828805,691828804,691828803],"class_list":{"0":"post-330187","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-ai","9":"tag-fake-science","10":"tag-peer-reviewed","11":"tag-wiley","13":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/Big-brother-is-watching-you-1.jpeg?fit=1422%2C800&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1nTB","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":221877,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=221877","url_meta":{"origin":330187,"position":0},"title":"Hindawi and Wiley to Retract over 500 Papers Linked to Peer Review Rings","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"03\/10\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"We asked what prompted the investigation.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/image-95.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/image-95.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/image-95.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/image-95.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":407808,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=407808","url_meta":{"origin":330187,"position":1},"title":"Paper Chase: A Global Industry Fuels Scientific Fraud in the U.S.","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"12\/10\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"In southern India, a new enterprise called Peer Publicon Consultancy offers a full suite of services to scientific researchers. It will not only write a scholarly paper for a fee but also guarantee publishing the fraudulent work in a respected journal.\u00a0","rel":"","context":"In \"Committee on Publishing Ethics (COPE)\"","block_context":{"text":"Committee on Publishing Ethics (COPE)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=committee-on-publishing-ethics-cope"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQOEhUmD6wjhGGXr_0KFsjw3VVsaiH5ydpoS3VddfqojH_9v52zGbSNsM-9EdDE8igha5rys2AsD_Y0TMo5mLDS0s0KIQqgq3cCymfsDd2HVyk-abWeQDV1hZDUzKMDP-1.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQOEhUmD6wjhGGXr_0KFsjw3VVsaiH5ydpoS3VddfqojH_9v52zGbSNsM-9EdDE8igha5rys2AsD_Y0TMo5mLDS0s0KIQqgq3cCymfsDd2HVyk-abWeQDV1hZDUzKMDP-1.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQOEhUmD6wjhGGXr_0KFsjw3VVsaiH5ydpoS3VddfqojH_9v52zGbSNsM-9EdDE8igha5rys2AsD_Y0TMo5mLDS0s0KIQqgq3cCymfsDd2HVyk-abWeQDV1hZDUzKMDP-1.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQOEhUmD6wjhGGXr_0KFsjw3VVsaiH5ydpoS3VddfqojH_9v52zGbSNsM-9EdDE8igha5rys2AsD_Y0TMo5mLDS0s0KIQqgq3cCymfsDd2HVyk-abWeQDV1hZDUzKMDP-1.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQOEhUmD6wjhGGXr_0KFsjw3VVsaiH5ydpoS3VddfqojH_9v52zGbSNsM-9EdDE8igha5rys2AsD_Y0TMo5mLDS0s0KIQqgq3cCymfsDd2HVyk-abWeQDV1hZDUzKMDP-1.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":396125,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=396125","url_meta":{"origin":330187,"position":2},"title":"\u2018Orwellian\u2019 firing at the American Journal of Economics and Sociology for publishing a climate skeptic paper","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"19\/08\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Well, it is official,\u00a0Marty Rowland PhD\u00a0has been fired from his position as Special Issue Editor at the\u00a0American Journal of Economics and Sociology\u00a0(AJES). The reason he was given for being fired was his publication of our paper,\u00a0Carbon Dioxide and a Warming Climate are not problems. The paper has been cited 23\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"American Journal of Economics and Sociology\u00a0(AJES)\"","block_context":{"text":"American Journal of Economics and Sociology\u00a0(AJES)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=american-journal-of-economics-and-sociology-ajes"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQNJcQK1-p1qP8O8PyZbG51Pxd_SxJ-dGH_sy1dMM5cT11swdOoupTvKkvFkDlO_xOMcqEfTbLUpR8eE7tzU1twBYnhy4hshw_ROpL-tptdDzrvWAH_xQzMZS0L7q5H1vR5eygYDzic21WiTb2MLolHL0Lg7Mg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQNJcQK1-p1qP8O8PyZbG51Pxd_SxJ-dGH_sy1dMM5cT11swdOoupTvKkvFkDlO_xOMcqEfTbLUpR8eE7tzU1twBYnhy4hshw_ROpL-tptdDzrvWAH_xQzMZS0L7q5H1vR5eygYDzic21WiTb2MLolHL0Lg7Mg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQNJcQK1-p1qP8O8PyZbG51Pxd_SxJ-dGH_sy1dMM5cT11swdOoupTvKkvFkDlO_xOMcqEfTbLUpR8eE7tzU1twBYnhy4hshw_ROpL-tptdDzrvWAH_xQzMZS0L7q5H1vR5eygYDzic21WiTb2MLolHL0Lg7Mg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQNJcQK1-p1qP8O8PyZbG51Pxd_SxJ-dGH_sy1dMM5cT11swdOoupTvKkvFkDlO_xOMcqEfTbLUpR8eE7tzU1twBYnhy4hshw_ROpL-tptdDzrvWAH_xQzMZS0L7q5H1vR5eygYDzic21WiTb2MLolHL0Lg7Mg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/0AQNJcQK1-p1qP8O8PyZbG51Pxd_SxJ-dGH_sy1dMM5cT11swdOoupTvKkvFkDlO_xOMcqEfTbLUpR8eE7tzU1twBYnhy4hshw_ROpL-tptdDzrvWAH_xQzMZS0L7q5H1vR5eygYDzic21WiTb2MLolHL0Lg7Mg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":359775,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=359775","url_meta":{"origin":330187,"position":3},"title":"The AJES Response to May & Crok","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"30\/12\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"This post is mostly a list of errors and misinformation in the\u00a0AJES\u00a0(The American Journal of Economics and Sociology) board\u2019s\u00a0response\u00a0by Ted Gwartney and Alexandra Lough to\u00a0May & Crok. But first I applaud the board\u2019s decision to formally publish the paper they invited May & Crok to write for their special climate\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"AJES\u00a0(The American Journal of Economics and Sociology)\"","block_context":{"text":"AJES\u00a0(The American Journal of Economics and Sociology)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=ajes-the-american-journal-of-economics-and-sociology"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-30-164404.png?fit=1200%2C652&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-30-164404.png?fit=1200%2C652&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-30-164404.png?fit=1200%2C652&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-30-164404.png?fit=1200%2C652&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-30-164404.png?fit=1200%2C652&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":415493,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=415493","url_meta":{"origin":330187,"position":4},"title":"Peer-Reviewing Peer Review","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/12\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"We\u2019re told, endlessly, that science is a self-correcting machine. A pristine engine of truth where bad ideas are discarded, and good ones rise to the top like cream. We are told to\u00a0\u201cTrust The Science\u2122\u201c\u00a0because it has passed the magical, mystical trial known as\u00a0Peer Review.","rel":"","context":"In \"\u201csophisticated global networks\u201d\"","block_context":{"text":"\u201csophisticated global networks\u201d","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=sophisticated-global-networks"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/0AQOHQLpQZ-HBGVDRmGb2-fMsaY5QvJYypJZGDrQl7uirwrO89EA237ct6PtPMweZt2iAodbOmI6gfbccHlBmcKvCbUe_4-bKJd-ZM4nbc1yb3BUQeCo9xtKHDsmmqq9X-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C677&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/0AQOHQLpQZ-HBGVDRmGb2-fMsaY5QvJYypJZGDrQl7uirwrO89EA237ct6PtPMweZt2iAodbOmI6gfbccHlBmcKvCbUe_4-bKJd-ZM4nbc1yb3BUQeCo9xtKHDsmmqq9X-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C677&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/0AQOHQLpQZ-HBGVDRmGb2-fMsaY5QvJYypJZGDrQl7uirwrO89EA237ct6PtPMweZt2iAodbOmI6gfbccHlBmcKvCbUe_4-bKJd-ZM4nbc1yb3BUQeCo9xtKHDsmmqq9X-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C677&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/0AQOHQLpQZ-HBGVDRmGb2-fMsaY5QvJYypJZGDrQl7uirwrO89EA237ct6PtPMweZt2iAodbOmI6gfbccHlBmcKvCbUe_4-bKJd-ZM4nbc1yb3BUQeCo9xtKHDsmmqq9X-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C677&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/0AQOHQLpQZ-HBGVDRmGb2-fMsaY5QvJYypJZGDrQl7uirwrO89EA237ct6PtPMweZt2iAodbOmI6gfbccHlBmcKvCbUe_4-bKJd-ZM4nbc1yb3BUQeCo9xtKHDsmmqq9X-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C677&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":237374,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=237374","url_meta":{"origin":330187,"position":5},"title":"The Rise and Fall of Peer Review","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"02\/01\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Adam Mastroianni\u00a0has written a marvelous article at his\u00a0substack, Experimental History, evaluating the history, the function and the misfunction of the peer review process.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-38.png?fit=1100%2C751&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-38.png?fit=1100%2C751&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-38.png?fit=1100%2C751&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-38.png?fit=1100%2C751&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-38.png?fit=1100%2C751&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/330187","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=330187"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/330187\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":330193,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/330187\/revisions\/330193"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/330190"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=330187"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=330187"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=330187"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}