Also, while not explicit in the article (which is mostly focused on hard biology), lumping all hardnesses of "scientist" together is a problem in general. Addit

Also, while not explicit in the article (which is mostly focused on hard biology), lumping all hardnesses of "scientist" together is a problem in general. Additionally, many claims that appear "hard" are actually pretty weak (sample size, etc.), even without outright fraud. To pick a uncontroversial example: scientists have made all sorts of false claims about food/diet in the last 50 years, and their retracted imperatives have taught people to reject listening to them. Since "scientist" (and "doctor", "professor") are the major terms that people think of, that distrust then spreads across to other fields.