[p-e-w]

> 150 years ago we had phlogiston alongside Maxwell on electromagnetism.

First, phlogiston theory was considered obsolete by the late 1700s, so you're off by a couple of decades.

Second, that's not even remotely comparable. While phlogiston theory is incorrect, at the time it was first proposed it seemed as good a guess as any other, and remained a viable explanation for how combustion worked until experiments proved it wrong. What's happening today is that respected researchers at reputable institutions publish results that they know are wrong or statistically meaningless, in order to game the academic system towards awarding them greater respect and influence. The problem is fraud, not ignorance.

[robotresearcher]

What's the basis to believe that this is worse now than other times in history, or on average?

I strongly suspect there's a survival bias, where the past fraudulent and otherwise incorrect stuff is forgotten in favor of the great stuff. So it always feels like today is the worst time ever.

[thrown_22]

> What's the basis to believe that this is worse now than other times in history, or on average?

We produce more science now than ever before. If you have 10 scientists and 9 of them produce rubbish it won't take you long to read a paper from the one who doesn't.

If you have 10,000,000 and 9,000,000 produce rubbish you can spend a thousands lifetimes reading nothing but rubbish.