Dr. Jens Foell
banner
jensfoell.de
Dr. Jens Foell
@jensfoell.de
I used to scan brains, now I talk about science for a living. Science editor, science podcaster, SPIEGEL-bestselling writer. Founder of @realscientists.de and trainer at @nawik.de. Looks even worse IRL. He/him.

NEW BOOK IN MAY 2026

🔗 https://jensfoell.de
Amazing — thank you for your service to science
November 28, 2025 at 11:24 PM
You know how it goes, the intern always gets the blame 😅
November 28, 2025 at 8:26 PM
Reposted by Dr. Jens Foell
This paper is only the tip of an iceberg. The journals will not blacklist their editors. In many cases, they don't retract papers, despite open fraud. The trust is quickly eroding. Just to try such a stunt, shows the low expectations people have in the editorial process.
November 28, 2025 at 1:24 PM
I think that's a fair assessment
November 28, 2025 at 1:09 PM
I think the practical problems are roughly comparable, for better or worse, to those with trying to keep plagiarism out of academia
November 28, 2025 at 12:51 PM
If we don’t stick together quickly and decisively, public trust in science *will* die, and rightfully so. Let’s not let that happen.

6/6
November 28, 2025 at 12:36 PM
Then: Investigate and, if needed, blacklist all authors, reviewers, and editors that were involved with this paper. This is independent from the other thing, because no matter if there was AI involved or not, they have chosen not to fulfill their important duty for science.

5/6
November 28, 2025 at 12:36 PM
First, obviously, ban all gen AI tools for the creation of academic text and images. Punish violations with immediate rejection. AI tools are neither accurate nor transparent, and science doesn’t need them. Kick them all out.

4/6
November 28, 2025 at 12:36 PM
Even if we find a way that science itself survives this, trust in science is something much more fickle. I don’t think scientists have understood how important and fragile the public‘s trust in their work really is. They trust us to be accurate and transparent, but we’re not. How can we fix this?
3/
November 28, 2025 at 12:36 PM
What these cases teach us is that there are authors, reviewers and editors in academia who are willing to create and publish something without even taking a cursory look at it. And thanks to AI, authors can create stuff with the click of a button.

This is a potentially disastrous situation.

2/6
November 28, 2025 at 12:36 PM
Usually there are mechanisms to blacklist reviewers for a journal or publisher, which is certainly appropriate here.
November 28, 2025 at 12:19 PM
Nope — he’s only a bit unclear about how to write one specific sound (that’s also present in the topmost line)
November 28, 2025 at 9:10 AM
Love you right back, hope you’re doing well today
November 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM
Das hat meine Frau auch erst gedacht, aber das ist tatsächlich das schwierigste Wort — es soll heißen „Truck“
November 28, 2025 at 7:00 AM
Unfortunately I haven’t gotten around to introducing him to Godzilla lore yet 😬
November 28, 2025 at 6:58 AM
Nah dran auf alle Fälle 😁
November 28, 2025 at 6:58 AM
So close! It’s a pool full of guacamole, the rest is correct! 🙌🏻🙌🏻
November 28, 2025 at 6:57 AM
Impressive!
November 28, 2025 at 6:54 AM