Over 100 papers were allegedly improperly reviewed in this one journal alone. The only assumption we can realistically make is that this problem is far more widespread than we may believe.
No that's what _you_ can make. However your understanding of logic and science is obviously lacking. The evidence doesn't support your conclusion.
We'd like to trust research scientists. They're considered some of the most intelligent, educated, and trustworthy people around. But after incidents like this, we can't help but have many questions and lots of doubt.
Reasonable people expect them to be people. Anti-scientist idiots paint them as greedy lying bastards that want to turn people from God. Very few ordinary people have your idea of angels in flesh...
In fact, if we're truly practicing anything resembling science, we can have only one hypothesis in this situation: all peer-reviewed research may have been affected by faulty peer review processes.
That's not even remotely related to being scientific. Using the same train of thoughts would lead to the conclusion that because homosexual behavior is widespread in nature (fact) not only are homosexuality natural as occurring in nature without external forcing factors (fact) but all animals are homosexual. Instead the logical conclusion is that homosexuality exists, is natural but _not_ the only (nor the most common) sexual orientation.
Until proven otherwise, I think we'll have to take any and all academic research with a really big grain of salt.
Bullshit. First of all maybe you should note that the research itself haven't been disproved (yet at least) second maybe you should compare the amount of research done with the the amount of known faulty peer reviews. Or your "logic" would say that because there are fake dollar bills around all dollar bills should be taken "with a really big grain of salt".