I've tried emailing peers for code and they would ignore me. I then got my advisor to talk to their advisor because I couldn't replicate their program and I got code sent to me. It was nowhere near what was explained in the paper and didn't give the results. Nothing happened. No retraction, no nothing. Just made it harder for me to publish my paper because it is very hard to beat results that were made up.

So what I'm saying is, I agree with your point here. The proof is in the pudding. Journals are convincing everyone that anything not in them is false and garbage but once garbage gets into them it creates and impossible bar to pass. Now repeat this for 50 or so years in a highly competitive space and what do you get? Well I think we all know the old saying: garbage in...