Corrupted Science: Fraud, Ideology and Politics in Science

John Grant's Science

by John Grant

In Discarded Science , John Grant took a fascinating look at all the things science got wrong through the centuries. But at least those were honest mistakes. Grant’s equally absorbing follow-up examines something more deliberate hoaxes and frauds. He takes us through a rogue’s gallery that features faked creatures, palaeontological trickery, false psychics, and miracle cures that aren’t so miraculous. See how ideology, religion, and politics have imposed themselves on science throughout history, from the Catholic Church’s influence on cosmology to Nazi racist pseudoscience to the Bush Administration’s attempt to deny climate change. The themes, while entertaining as ever, are serious and timely.

Genres: Science, History, Nonfiction, Politics, Environment, Social Science

336 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 2007

About the author

John Grant is author of over eighty books, of which about twenty-five are fiction, including novels like The World, The Hundredfold Problem, The Far-Enough Window and most recently The Dragons of Manhattan and Leaving Fortusa. His “book-length fiction” Dragonhenge, illustrated by Bob Eggleton, was shortlisted for a Hugo Award in 2003; its successor was The Stardragons. His first story collection, Take No Prisoners, appeared in 2004. He is editor of the anthology New Writings in the Fantastic, which was shortlisted for a British Fantasy Award. His novellas The City in These Pages and The Lonely Hunter have appeared from PS Publishing.

His latest fiction book is Tell No Lies , his second story collection; it's published by Alchemy Press. His most recent nonfiction is A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of Film Noir . Earlier, he coedited with John Clute The Encyclopedia of Fantasy and wrote in their entirety all three editions of The Encyclopedia of Walt Disney’s Animated Characters; both encyclopedias are standard reference works in their field. Among other recent nonfictions have been Discarded Science, Corrupted Science (a USA Today Book of the Year), Bogus Science and Denying Science.

As John Grant he has to date received two Hugo Awards, the World Fantasy Award, the Locus Award, and a number of other international literary awards. He has written books under other names, even including his real one: as Paul Barnett, he has written a few books (like the space operas Strider’s Galaxy and Strider’s Universe) and for a number of years ran the world-famous fantasy-artbook imprint Paper Tiger, for this work earning a Chesley Award and a nomination for the World Fantasy Award.

Reviews

[LIsa Noell "Rocking the chutzpah!" · Rating 1 out of 5]

No. Just no. Who wrote this? Moses and his uneducated bible buddies? Pence? If you enjoy being bored out of your mind, and reading pages of stupidity, then this is the book for you! Don't write, just call 1-800-haveigotaloadforyou! Oh Crikey! Was this dense? Why yes, yes it was! I tried to find chapters that would interest me, but no. I would like to thank the publishers and Netgalley for allowing me to read and review this awful mess, but to be honest...I'm busy working on getting a few hair or fingernail clippings from them at the moment. I have a few dolls to make, and poke!
Uneducated nonsense.

[Nicholas Karpuk · Rating 2 out of 5]

A pissy tone in writing troubles me deeply. It's doubly troubling when I'm otherwise enjoying the content.

"Corrupted Science" covers some pretty fascinating territories. Discussing the abuses of science both from within and without is pretty fascinating stuff. The first third of the book works great for this reason.

Reading about often famous scientists who fudged their data, gaffs by the military in resesarch in development, and funded pseudoscience like ESP are all well discussed.

The first issue I have comes up in the Intelligent Design chapter. John Grant is one of those delightful people who seems to think religion in its entirety is retarded and unnecessary. It's the first chapter where some unprofessional prose creeps in, with smart ass jokey asides that really break the flow of reading.

This really isn't the forum for a religious discussion, so I'll be brief in saying that regardless of your faith or belief, stating you are certain about the unknowable is a theist argument.

Anytime people start arguing on either side about evolution and religion, I usually find myself confused as to why the argument is occurring.

The last chunk of the book I take issue more on formatting than content. Here's the chapter flow:

Hitler
Stalin
George W. Bush

Seriously? We're really going to phrase our argument by indirectly comparing the former doofus in chief to of the most terrifying mass murdering despots in history? Really?

The Hitler and Stalin chapters are rather interesting taken on their own. The Bush chapter is even insightful in regards to the administrations battles with the FDA and EPA over various issues. But collectively it comes off as a bit melodramatic.

Overall the biggest impression I get from this book is that we as a people don't know nearly enough about science. It hurts us in many areas, and makes for laziness in the government and in the press when handling it. This is a valuable point and I wish it had been more the focus.

It's not a boring book by any means, but it loses massive points from me for the lack of professionalism. I have no patience for this Michael Moore crap in my non-fiction.

[Truff · Rating 1 out of 5]

I bought this book through mail order and should have read some amazon reviews of it first, not being familiar with the author.
"corrupted science" I figured there'd be a big chapter on the hoax that is global warming. Yeah, there is, but the author accuses those not believing in the watermelon theory of wealth distribution through carbon credits as being "unintellectuals".

Don't pick this book up unless you lean left.

[Mandy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this well-researched exploration of the hoaxes, frauds, manipulation of scientific data, fudged results and general corruption in science entertaining up to a point, but the writing is episodic and disjointed and it’s probably best read in bite-size chunks rather than consecutively, which was perhaps my mistake. It comes as no surprise that science has often been abused by the powers that be for their own nefarious ends and/or personal gain, so I didn’t find the book particularly shocking and by the end had actually got a bit fed-up with example after example of yet more corruption in science, especially when the author saw fit to link Bush with Hitler and Stalin. I’m no fan of Bush but it hardly seems fair to rank him alongside such evil men, even if he didn’t always adhere closely to the facts in his policy making. But overall it’s a readable and accessible look at the history of science and the way the facts can be interpreted for sinister ends, and it’s certainly a corrective to any idea that scientists are necessarily above self-interest and only concerned with verifiable fact.

[Craig3m · Rating 4 out of 5]

Corrupted Science by John Grant covers a lot of territory. It describes the politically motivated corruption of science from ancient times to present. The book is very easy to read. The last chapter covers the major corruption in three countries in recent times. Nazi Germany lost World War II because of the extreme corruption/politically corrected physics, biology, and mathematics. Similarly, the Stalinist Soviet Union suffered in politicized agicultural science, genetics and other areas, eventually leading to the political collapse of the country. The third country is described as the george W. Bush United States, where religiously politicized science has led to inaccurate government propaganda and inadequate policies in the areas of global warming, sex education, stem cell research, and numerous other areas. In all three cases the denial of scientific conclusions led to the corruption of critical thinking processes. These were used to incorrectly determine the thrust of national priorities, in leading to damage of those nations.

[Anita · Rating 4 out of 5]

Though you might not guess it from the title, this is an entertaining defense of science. He won me over in the little section on signing chimps.

[BethK · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book as a pre-release e-book obtained through NetGalley, provided by the publisher.

Contemporary news articles and websites have a distinct anti-scientific bias, all the while telling us of some new “wow” discovery. Some are outright frauds. Some studies draw conclusions based on the researchers’ ideologies, or to please the ideologies they perceive their funding sources to have – whether or not that perception is factual. Conspiracy Central has their own followers, that things are the way they are because of some conspiracy by some group for whatever reasons go into their agenda. Some are outright deniers of science, often replacing it with “ancient knowledge” that appeals to that person. Scientific papers have their conflicts of interests, and some scientific journals will publish nearly anything, for a price. Investigative journalists have exposed many papers to have been ghost-written, often by corporations seeking to sell products based on the research in the paper(s), and an even larger problem is the listing of a well-known researcher as the primary author of a paper when he hasn’t seen it. Sometimes “gifts” are offered for the use of the person’s name, and other times an unknown author will just put the name of the well-known person on the bad paper. This takes away from the reputation of the scientist. Bad science will be ousted by good science, and even good science will be superseded by better science in the future. However, corrupted science, whether by fraud or ideology has a nasty tendency to become accepted, and to send scientific advances back by decades.

Throughout history, we’ve been taught things that “just aren’t so”. That includes many basic scientific facts taught in elementary schools over the past century – and many of the things which are true attributed to the wrong person – who merely republished or restated an earlier scientist’s work without attribution.

Court cases are frequently corrupted by the use of “expert witnesses”. Woo scientists, and alternative medicine practitioners may be put on the stand as an expert witness by one side. They have no problem vehemently testifying that something is an absolute fact. Alternative medicine practitioners, especially, are very nice, personable people. Woo scientists can state what they want as clear facts, whereas actual scientists use "weasel words" like "so far as it's understood…" or "General consensus of opinion is that…", as all scientific theories – which are as close to facts as we can have, may be superseded in the future with new research and data. Scientists generally, are not so much good communicators with high charisma. Juries and even judges like the woo scientists, and often rule in their favor.

There is a long chapter on medical science. There are a lot of historical quack cures, as well as contemporary ones, some popularly believed, some sold as “alternative” treatments – often making vast sums of money. Some by people who genuinely believe the hype, some are knowingly selling people what has been proven to not work, or at least not been proven to work. At best, these just waste money. At worst, it delays a patient receiving actual treatment until after it’s too late to do any good.

The question Is how to tell the difference – whether you are a researcher, corporation seeking to use the science, or an individual.

Cultural beliefs and a-priori beliefs about the matter effect the conclusions of scientific studies, even very good ones. Scientists are not exempt from seeing what they want to see or what they’ve been trained to see, even in the face of measurements and data telling them that the contrary is proven.

All of human kind suffers from this corrupted science. It's far far easier to start a lie and get it believed than it is to get the lie out of common discourse once it's exposed.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant, funny look at the abuse of science

I loved this book. As a defense of good science, it is a funny, brilliant analysis of bad science. The author has a great sense of humor and uses it liberally, along with some biting sarcasm. And there are no taboo areas: the author goes after big business, government, and even scientists who stand in the way of the appropriate use of science. I had one quibble with the content where I think the book trivialized some mental illnesses. Nonetheless, the book is one of the best science books I’ve ever read and I strongly recommend it.
Disclosure: I received a complimentary copy of this book via Netgalley for review purposes.

[Steve Dewey · Rating 2 out of 5]

Two stars to indicate that it was indeed, okay. However, it was very much an endless list book, with little that was new to me, unfortunately. It might be a good place to start, though, if you are new to understanding science and certain problematic aspects of science production.

[Tom · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent overview of corruption in science, committed by politicians, and scientists.

[Tim Falk · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting, if a bit rambling and opinionated at times.

[***Dave Hill · Rating 4 out of 5]

(Original review: http://hill-kleerup.org/blog/2009/02/...)

Overall: Good
Writing: Fair
Re-Readability: Good
Info: Good

Grant provides an entertaining, sometimes outrageous, usually fascinating survey of scientific research and publication that has been corrupted in different fashions — faking data (intentionally or not), seeing what is expected (or desired) out of experiments, military wild goose chases (and corrupted budgets), religious and other popular ideology, and, finally, by governments with axes to grind. In the last case, Grant focuses in on Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, and Bush’s America.

The writing is anecdotal and episodic, making it an easy book to pick up and set down. That’s also its biggest drawback. Grant’s thesis on the falsification of science — that the scientific method is so powerful because it is self-checking, but occasionally weak because it presumes good faith on the part of its participants — holds true, but is diluted by the myriad causes he describes, as well as the increasing political vitriol (deserved, but over-wrought) in his final chapter on the Bush Administration’s shameless and wanton twisting (and denial) of science to their own ends.

Still, it makes for some interesting contrasts. Some anti-science True Believers will be most tickled by the first few chapters, where we see scientist successfully (for a time) getting away with faked or delusional results, and the not-infrequent resistance of the scientific community to turn on them when the perpetrators are important or have powerful supporters. Those same gleeful readers will in turn pitch a fit when it comes to Grant’s resounding dismissal of Creationism/Intelligent Design and lambasting of the Dubya years when science was repeated distorted or disregarded to deny global warming, condemn abortion, and support abstinence education, along with other business- and/or conservative-friendly results.

It’s all pretty good stuff, well-organized in its far reach, but ultimately diluted by it. This could have been easily turned into three or four books on its own; by squeezing it into one, some of Grant’s focus is lost, even if any given page or chapter remains highly entertaining.

[S.P. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting. Grant initially explores corrupted and self-deluded science and scientists thought he ages – those looking for fame, fortune and those that went to great lengths to convince the world that they were right. Then he moves onto more organised pseudo-science in the Military and religious worlds. This leads on to ideology and politics and into the perversions of science carried out by Nazi Germany and the Stalinist USSR. Finally Grant considered the systematic obstruction and denial of Scientific facts by the Bush administration. It is perhaps a little unfair to compare Bush’s America with the atrocities carried out by Germany and the USSR in the name of ‘science’, however the author certainly points you in the right direction if you ever wondered what is going on with a all that Intelligent Design rubbish and Global Warming (‘Climate Change’). Worth a read if you are interested in Science, though if you already read the scientific journals you’ll probably know most of what is levied against Bush.

[Maria · Rating 3 out of 5]

As far as I now remember, the flaw with this book was that though the author tries to be "scientific" and objective in his analysis of the corruption of science for political means etc, in reality it descends into an emotional diatribe against these corruptions which are sometimes as provable as those corruptions themselves. A little hypocritical at times but generally a good read

[Joan · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very comprehensive discussion of misunderstandings/misrepresentation/misinterpretation of science. Unfortunately, the author wanders away from simple discussing science and inserts his own biases, which seem to be anti-religion and anti-conservative. The book is very well referenced so that readers can dig deeper into the examples presented.

[Fynn · Rating 3 out of 5]

An entertaining read, but one glaring omission: Grant barely touches on the many, many examples of science - or pseudoscience - being misused to justify the denial of opportunity to women. Instead, there's a bizarre paragraph or two on, of all things, Valerie Solanas and the SCUM Manifesto, which doesn't exactly count as science.

[Martha · Rating 4 out of 5]

The style is choppy, detailed, and disconnected but some of the parts are scary and the sum of the parts is frightening. Politics and science, war and science, religion and science have a history that science often loses to illiteracy, willful ignorance, bias, hatred, and fervid belief.

[Phillip Gallegos · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting, and somewhat sad - Illustrates the unfortunate truth of how science is influenced by ideologies. Reinforces the need to examine not just the science, but who is presenting it (media, politicians, etc...)

[Robert Wilson · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting subject and many good examples. Actually, too many without enough to hold it together, making it a bit disjointed. It is also a bit partisan. I tend to agree with the author's viewpoint, but his objectivity suffers nonetheless, and that's a problem given the subject of the book.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful book!

[Phillis · Rating 5 out of 5]

I could'nt stand all of it

[daniel dirnfeld · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book

[Pavel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very entertaining book of case-studies of fraudulent behaviour in science.

[Whay2go · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fun read which can provide some interesting insights.

[Jenn · Rating 1 out of 5]

I struggled with reading this book. I didn’t start at the beginning which was a mistake. I first read the section which discussed “microbes and the days of creation”. This is a well known creationists theory, I appreciated his thoughts here as this is a difficult subject to properly test. (He mention peer review-which brings me to the next section I read.

As someone who worked in research for too many years, I jumped ahead to the section titled “Big Pharma”. I was disappointed to find most of the information included was outdated or incorrect, “shadow writer”. It’s unfortunate your short couple of paragraphs may discourage someone from receiving clinical trial medications by your negativity.

I will not be finishing the book,

Thanks to #NetGalley and the Publisher for an ARC for my honest opinion