“Across the social sciences, half of research doesn’t replicate”

That’s an April headline from science[dot]org, reporting on a study of 100 published papers:

“A sweeping project involving hundreds of researchers in several dozen countries showed that across the social sciences, the findings of roughly half of all papers cannot be replicated independently…the effort investigated more than 100 papers published in dozens of leading journals in business, economics, education, political science, psychology, and sociology. The replication success rate—49% for the 164 papers evaluated, reported today in Nature—is consistent with findings from previous studies in individual fields such as psychology, suggesting the problem is pervasive in the social sciences.”

To put it another way, half the literature was a load of crap.

And the study was conducted by conventional analysts, not by people who question and reject the very foundations of these “sciences.” So the true figure of failure is far, far worse.

All this research which can’t be replicated? Call it what you want to. Fraud, error, hope parading as fact-finding, wishful thinking, desperation to pick up a paycheck.

—And WE’RE supposed to be the conspiracy theorists peddling unproven claims.

The social sciences aren’t sciences at all. They’re sewers.

Inhabited by denizens who traffic in murk while pretending they’re upstanding normies.

Psychologists are my favorites: