The article also points out that similar fraud occurs in the natural sciences (it is worryingly easy to falsify experimental data, assuming nobody is looking to

The article also points out that similar fraud occurs in the natural sciences (it is worryingly easy to falsify experimental data, assuming nobody is looking too closely). But even those who are deeply critical of contemporary practices in natural science research don’t discredit the entire discipline. Being able to slip some garbage papers into some journals by itself really doesn’t prove anything about a specific discipline, at least not without a comparative analysis of published fraudulent papers (between, say, sociology and physics) that AFAIK doesn’t exist. You could follow your logic to claim that all disciplines have a validity problem... but then what is the point of the observation, other than that human reasoning is imperfect?