95% of published papers are bullst and you know it the moment you read the abstract. The problem is having the time and energy along with a healthy disregard for the gatekeepers on your academic path to keep pursuing this.
That's why it usually takes an outsider to publicize this stuff.
When I think about how most papers are written by a student, with credit given to their professor, and I think of what a mess is code written by developers the same age as those grad students... It’s amazing we get as much right as we do.
And I know we are getting things right because I have a phone in my pocket that has surmounted thousands upon thousands of puzzles in physics and chemistry over the last twenty years to do what it does.
I’d wager that most papers in most fields are bullshit, but it doesn’t matter because no one reads them or bothers to attempt applying them or building on them.
In my field (robotics, ML) many papers are not interesting or overstate the consequences of the result, but I wouldn't go as far as to say 95% are bullshit.
That's why it usually takes an outsider to publicize this stuff.