Maybe. It even penetrated as far as the New York Times:
Retractions can be good things, since even scientists often fail to acknowledge their mistakes, preferring instead to allow erroneous findings simply to wither away in the back alleys of unreproducible literature. But they don’t surprise those of us who are familiar with how science works; we’re surprised only that retractions aren’t even more frequent.
…
Every day, on average, a scientific paper is retracted because of misconduct. Two percent of scientists admit to tinkering with their data in some kind of improper way. That number might appear small, but remember: Researchers publish some 2 million articles a year, often with taxpayer funding. In each of the last few years, the Office of Research Integrity, part of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, has sanctioned a dozen or so scientists for misconduct ranging from plagiarism to fabrication of results. More.
Thought: If two percent of our savings were invested in unreliable instruments, what would we do?
All News knows is: Investors: Don’t buy any more stock in pom poms or loudhailers for “science.” A serious cleanup may be coming. Check your mail.
Note: O’Leary for News admits to being mainly interested in medical science. Where reality matters.
Cosmology, by contrast, is a sanctuary for mildly interesting crackpots.
See also: If peer review is working, why all the retractions?
Follow UD News at Twitter!