Using Pokémon to detect scientific misinformation
If you publish a paper with fake 'good' data, why would some spurrious animal names even be relevant? 'Zubat'? Epidemiologists probably don't know the English-Chinese translation for the million species in China.<p>This is not really spoofing, this is just plain fraud, right?<p>When they fill papers full of jargon, data that doesn't make sense, crazy political posturing so that the paper reads as something fantastical - and it gets by - that's a problem.<p>But this seems to be merely a real concern that it's quite a bit of work to reproduce scientific results and that someone doing a quick review of a paper has no material way of validating 'everything'.<p>The paper 'looked promising' because it was promising, assuming those sending it in weren't completely making everything up.<p>You could make a fake passport that might fool a lot of people, that doesn't mean the system is broken.<p>Science maybe has problems but I'm not sure this one strikes at it very well.