When scientists go nuts: bizarre outputs in publications

Doing Science and communicating science are two different arts altogether. Scientists perform their research in the laboratory and convey the findings in the research articles. The laboratory works are rigorously executed with proper protocol and standardizations. The outputs of the experiments and findings thereof reported in the peer-reviewed articles are mostly conceived by academic peers. The generalised way of scientific writing, particularly the methods and results portion, is perceived as monotonous for the general audience [1].

The cold and competent spirit of science communication needs to be revamped. Particularly in the era when science popularisation and scientific literacy peaked among the masses. The effective science communication is not only desired to get the scientists out of the privileged seclusion but also to bring in funding for their research [2].

While the majority of the publications process from the same conveyor belt, a few attempted exclusions from this, and some oozed their loopholes while doing so. I am attaching the screenshots of some papers which are from different leagues.