The very first comment for the first link sums it up...

The very first comment for the first link sums it up nicely,

‘Many people think that a ‘peer reviewed’ paper has somehow been validated as correct or adequate. The significance of peer review for publication is that the paper is considered suitable for publication on that particular journal. Real peer review occurs AFTER publication - when the professional community in that area reads and discusses the paper.’

So it is not surprising a fraudulent article can be published. That is a fraudulent person, not fraudulent science.

The science I put my ‘faith’ in has passed every review, test, judgement and criticism thrown at it. The cases you have presented have not.

To demonstrate that I put my 'faith' in fraudulent science, you need to show a case where science that is universally accepted as fact (such as the science taught in schools and universities) has been shown to be fraudulent.