Hi, Kyle. You bring up some great questions and I’m glad to have them as part of the conversation. Yes, it’s true that some highly-esteemed academic work has flaws. But academic journals are still orders of magnitude more trustworthy than most other sources; I stand by that.
What kind of question would you use to discriminate between trustworthy and untrustworthy academic research? I’m open to suggestions.
Though there are documented examples of scientists and news sources being biased by hidden influences or bribes, the whole reason this works is because their readership is in the dark about it. How, then, can the reader decide what to believe? He either has to disbelieve everything (because of the small possibility of intrigue), pick his sources arbitrarily (giving in entirely to confirmation bias), or believe everything that comes from a reputed source, but be willing to hold it accountable when bias is discovered. The last option is the only viable one. But if you have a better method in mind, I’m all ears.