Here is another powerful illustration of how what we take to be independent science is now carefully controlled:
The flow of science in this modern age is largely controlled by just six corporate publishing groups, which by calculated design have been gobbling up the journal market since at least the 1970s. And a new study out of Canada reveals that this mass consolidation of publishing power is, to a large extent, skewing what passes as scientific progress.
Researchers from the University of Montreal pored through the whole of scientific literature published between 1973 and 2013 and found that the publishing realm has changed dramatically during this time. Many smaller publishers have been absorbed into larger ones, for instance, and academic research groups have become increasingly beholden to the interests of these major publishers, which tend to favor large industries like pharmaceuticals and vaccines.
Much of the independence that was once cherished within the scientific community, in other words, has gone by the wayside as these major publishers have taken control and now dictate what types of content get published. The result is a publishing oligopoly in which scientists are muzzled by and overarching trend toward politically correct, and industry-favoring, “science.”
“Overall, the major publishers control more than half of the market of scientific papers both in the natural and medical sciences and in the social sciences and humanities,” said Professor Vincent Lariviere, lead author of the study from the University of Montreal’s School of Library and Information Science.
“Furthermore, these large commercial publishers have huge sales, with profit margins of nearly 40%. While it is true that publishers have historically played a vital role in the dissemination of scientific knowledge in the print era, it is questionable whether they are still necessary in today’s digital era.”
End of quote.
I am reminded of the recent conclusion of Dr. Richard Horton, the current editor-in-chief of the Lancet:
Dr. Horton recently published a statement declaring that a lot of published research is in fact unreliable at best, if not completely false.
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.” (source)…
End of quote.
Again, if you have begun to understand how completely controlled our world is behind the scenes, it all fits together. Unfortunately, most people simply do not want to know. To consider this possibility to any degree will fracture their nicely packaged view of reality, and they might need to adjust that sense of reality. Again, it is part of their belief system and they take that belief system to be them – which it is not. For most people without a true sense of who and what they are, to threaten that reality feels like a threat to their very being, which it is not. But, unfortunately, I do not expect this to change inside this current consciousness. In my experience, even those who see part of this picture are unable to countenance the entirety of what has been engineered and by whom. Until and unless they do, they are simply tilting at windmills and this saddens me. And then there are those who, as I’ve said, figure (usually unconsciously) they have life sorted out well enough to get through to death without contemplating the world is not as they perceive. Good luck with that one.