I’d expect there to be more demonstrations of fraud in the hard sciences, because their experiments can decisively falsify hypotheses, which makes for a clear contrast with the falsified reports in those disciplines. The data in the social sciences are more ambiguous, so allegations of fraud there couldn’t be as easily proven.

The whole thing is more partisan if we’re talking about people rather than physical objects. And that’s what I meant about the economics textbooks. I wasn’t implying that I’m personally qualified to judge that matter. Again, your reversion to ad hominem reveals only the tribal nature of your allegiance to the economics profession.

The documentary “Inside Job” shows the conflicts of interest that leading economists face because of the lure of lucrative consultancy jobs.