When Science Forgets Truth: Why We Need a Biblical Foundation
Description: In this thought-provoking video, we explore the growing crisis of credibility in modern science. Why are so many scientific studies unreliable? What happens when the pursuit of prestige, funding, and ideology takes priority over the search for truth? Drawing from real-world scandals, the rise of scientific fraud, and the pressures within academic publishing, we break down how incentives can corrupt even the most respected fields. Most importantly, we present the case for returning to a biblical foundation for truth—a perspective that emphasizes integrity, humility, and the unchanging standards of a Creator. Whether you're a skeptic, a believer, or simply curious about the intersection of faith and science, this video challenges you to rethink the authority behind what we call “truth.”
Editor: William Neal Craig, Doctor of Ministry (D.Min.) Candidate in Theology and Apologetics, Liberty University, John W. Rawlings School of Divinity
2/2/20264 min read
When Science Forgets Truth: The Case for a Return to a Biblical Foundation
For over a century, science has been seen as the most reliable means of discovering truth. Scientific authority has superseded Scriptural truth, and academic journals have assumed the role of church councils. Recently, scientists, journalists, and watchdogs have raised a critical question:
What takes place if the system meant to find truth starts rewarding other things instead?
The credibility of modern science is currently under scrutiny, not primarily from external critics but from internal pressures, incentives, and prevailing ideologies among the scientific community.
A System Built to Produce Papers, Not Truth
At the heart of the crisis is a simple but powerful phrase: “publish or perish.”
Academic advancement depends on frequent publication in prestigious journals and the acquisition of grants from major funding agencies. Careers, reputations, and salaries are often more closely linked to productivity and perceived impact than to accuracy.
This pattern has led some critics to describe the phenomenon as a “natural selection of bad science.”
Instead of carefully following the data, even when it is messy, researchers feel pressure to produce:
Clean narratives
Positive results
Splashy conclusions
Trend-aligned findings
Real science is usually slow, uncertain, and full of dead ends. However, the system rewards certainty, new ideas, and results that align with prevailing popular opinion. This creates a culture where neat stories are valued more than careful truth.
Some media coverage during the Bogdanov affair suggested that, in certain areas of theoretical physics, distinguishing a genuine scientific paper from a hoax can be difficult, raising concerns about scientific integrity and the peer-review process. They please academic reviewers and help get funding, but they do not truly advance knowledge.
From Corner-Cutting to Organized Fraud
Scientific misconduct is no longer simply the work of a few dishonest people. It has become much more organized and widespread worldwide.
The Rise of “Paper Mills”
Entire underground businesses now sell:
Fake authorships
Fabricated data
Purchased citations
Researchers can boost their résumés without doing real work, earning promotions and grant money for research that never actually took place.
Fraud has also become more advanced with technology. AI tools now generate entire papers, alter images, and bypass plagiarism checks. Some fake papers are so poorly written that automated word-swapping creates expressions like “provocative entrail illness” instead of bowel disease, yet they still made it through parts of the academic system.
When Fraud Harms Real People
This is not simply an embarrassment for academics. In medical research, fake or deeply flawed studies in areas like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease have led to billions of dollars and years of clinical trials wasted on dead ends. Patients and families put their hope in “breakthroughs” that later fall apart when examined closely.
When science chases prestige instead of truth, people suffer.
Ideology Enters the Lab
Along with corruption caused by incentives, many critics say that pressure from certain beliefs is changing whole fields of study.
In some academic groups, truth is seen less as something to discover and more as something formed by social and political forces. In this view, data is filtered through stories about power, oppression, and identity.
The well-known “grievance studies” hoax showed problems in some academic fields when fake, absurd papers on topics like “rape culture in dog parks” were accepted by peer-reviewed journals. The goal was not to mock all scholarship, but to show that in some areas, agreeing with certain beliefs can matter more than clear thinking and evidence.
Researchers who challenge the main ideas in disciplines such as climate science, biology, or social science may face backlash at work, miss out on funding opportunities, or have their reputations attacked. Instead of discussing the evidence, disagreement is sometimes seen as a moral problem.
When questioning a conclusion becomes risky, science loses its ability to correct itself.
High-Profile Failures
Several well-known cases have further shaken confidence:
Dietrich Stapel, a celebrated social psychologist, fabricated data in dozens of studies because real data was “messy” and didn’t tell the elegant stories journals wanted.
Mark Tessier-Lavigne, former Stanford president, resigned after investigations found manipulated images in research connected to his lab.
Even major findings in cosmology, such as some early dark energy research, have been questioned as new and better data challenge earlier ideas. These cases do not mean all science is broken, but they show how prestige, funding, and institutional protection can slow down accountability.
Why the Incentives Matter So Much
When professional survival depends on publication metrics:
Risky, innovative research is avoided.
Safe, fashionable topics dominate.
Negative results are buried.
Data gets “tidied” to look more convincing.
Hypotheses quietly shift after results are known.
Over time, this produces scientific “bubbles” where researchers cite one another, reinforce shared assumptions, and generate large volumes of work that impress insiders but deliver little real-world benefit.
A Different Foundation for Truth
Unlike this unstable situation, the biblical worldview gives us a very different place to start. The Bible says truth is based not on changing institutions, but on the character of a truthful, unchanging Creator. Reality is not just a social idea or a way to build a career; it is something people are meant to discover and share honestly.
Biblical ethics demand integrity:
Let your “yes” be yes and your “no,” no.
Truth is not negotiable, marketable, or adjustable for prestige. It is an ethical issue.
The biblical view also recognizes that people are flawed. Because of this, every human system, including science, can fall to pride, greed, fear, and self-deception. This honest view explains why corruption happens and why we must stay alert.
At the same time, the Christian worldview provides something modern cancel culture cannot: forgiveness and restoration. Failure is real, but so is redemption. That produces humility instead of moral posturing.
The Deeper Question
This discussion is about more than grants and peer review. It is really about authority.
Will truth be grounded in:
Changing institutions,
Politically influenced consensus,
And the reputations of experts
—or in—
A Creator who stands outside human systems,
Whose word is not up for revision,
And whose standards do not shift with cultural trends.
Human wisdom is able to achieve great things. But history shows it is also fragile, corruptible, and likely to make mistakes when it is not tied to moral and spiritual accountability.
A Call for Courage and Clarity
Fixing science will take more than new rules. It will take moral courage—people who are willing to tell the truth even if it risks their funding, status, or acceptance.
Christians should not turn away from science. Instead, we should ask that it return to its proper place: a valuable but limited human effort that works best when grounded in humility, honesty, and respect for God’s created order.
When science forgets truth, it becomes propaganda, performance, or profit-seeking.
When truth is anchored in God, inquiry becomes an act of stewardship — exploring a world that was designed, ordered, and declared “very good.”
And that foundation never needs peer review.
Resources
YouTube videos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0r49YOBqls.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZirYXiABogo
Podcast
