This is why you should always question scientific findings

(hat tip Mike the Mad Biologist)  Story here.

From this report, we know:

  1. Scientists will lie.
  2. Scientists can and do skew their findings towards results that are favorable towards the corporations funding their research.
  3. Scientists who speak the truth can be targets, and if it goes far enough, gangstalking as this scientist found out when he and his students were barred from the chemistry building, he was made the target of a fraud investigation, and the rumors degrading his reputation were so bad that he was continually asked to prove that he did not steal what research he had done.

My Research Dean promptly forbid me from submitting any publications. I had to spend two months making the case to legal counsel and the research integrity officer to establish that I had the right to publish. (The letter eventually appeared in JACS.)


My reputation was destroyed within the institution. I have been investigated by the NSF for grant fraud based on a trumped up charge over a memo that contained a clerical error. The charges were dismissed the same day federal agents came to NCSU to investigate, but I still had to endure the interrogation by two persistent agents who were trying to get a confession.  I was investigated in secret at NCSU for supposedly taping meetings without permission; I did not do this, but I could not defend myself since the allegation was kept secret.

Perhaps gangstalking is not the proper word, but when so many come together to destroy someone, gangstalking came to mind….especially the secrecy part. This is against the 6th Amendment:

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Further down, the question is asked how he would handle the whistleblower process.

I think the question is misdirection.  It should be asking why the hell are corporations funding research, when universities used to be funded by the government so that research was somewhat independent? (Although now, with revolving doors from gov’t to corporations would probably lead to the same pay to play.)  Integrity and morality have taken “the last train for the coast…”




Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s