Researchers are no longer trying to seek and speak the truth. Scientists no longer believe in the truth. They no longer believe that there is an eternal unchanging reality beyond our human organisation which they have a duty to discover and disseminate. Hence, the vast structures of personnel and resources that constitute modern science are not real science but merely a professional research bureaucracy.
The consequences? Research literature must be assumed to be worthless or misleading and should almost always be ignored.
In practice, this means that nearly all science needs to be demolished (or allowed to collapse) and real science rebuilt outside the professional research structure, from the ground up, by real scientists who regard truth-seeking as an imperative and truthfulness as an iron law.
It's a book by Bruce Charleton I highly recommend. He ran one of the last scientific journals (the last?) to have only an editorial board, without an anonymous peer review process. He thought peer review was a farce. In the end, he was pushed out of the journal by the publishers after he published an article that argued AIDS was a false construct, that it's multiple illnesses not caused by a single (HIV) virus. The journal was then over-hauled to include a peer-review process.
They no longer believe that there is an eternal unchanging reality beyond our human organisation which they have a duty to discover and disseminate.
a) what if eternal represents change and what if internal represents the choice to ignore being changed?
b) what if eternal organ (process of dying) generates internal intestine (living)?
c) what if DIS (separated from) COVER (to conceal) tempts one to ignore that nature reveals whole (perceivable) to each partial (perceiving)?
d) what if DIS (separated from) SEMINATE (to sow, seed) tempts one to ignore being the seed (growth) within the soil (loss)?
e) what if others suggest the call of DUTY (that which one owes to another) to tempt one to ignore being bound as partial (perceiving) to whole (perceivable)...not to others (suggested)?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Not-Even-Trying-Corruption-Science/dp/1908684186
It's a book by Bruce Charleton I highly recommend. He ran one of the last scientific journals (the last?) to have only an editorial board, without an anonymous peer review process. He thought peer review was a farce. In the end, he was pushed out of the journal by the publishers after he published an article that argued AIDS was a false construct, that it's multiple illnesses not caused by a single (HIV) virus. The journal was then over-hauled to include a peer-review process.
a) what if eternal represents change and what if internal represents the choice to ignore being changed?
b) what if eternal organ (process of dying) generates internal intestine (living)?
c) what if DIS (separated from) COVER (to conceal) tempts one to ignore that nature reveals whole (perceivable) to each partial (perceiving)?
d) what if DIS (separated from) SEMINATE (to sow, seed) tempts one to ignore being the seed (growth) within the soil (loss)?
e) what if others suggest the call of DUTY (that which one owes to another) to tempt one to ignore being bound as partial (perceiving) to whole (perceivable)...not to others (suggested)?