I generally agree, but: > And means the hiring committee didn’t do sufficient due diligence to even ask people on his field if his work was valid. Detecting f

I generally agree, but: > And means the hiring committee didn’t do sufficient due diligence to even ask people on his field if his work was valid. Detecting fraudulent results isn't always easy. If there was already a public controversy about his papers and they didn't pick up on that, that was a failing. In the worst case, faked results can only be detected by running a study over again and getting a different result -- and even then, it's hard to rule out some difference that wasn't properly controlled for, an honest mistake somewhere, or just bad luck. The standard of truth in science isn't peer review, it's having results that are consistently reproducible.