Sentences with phrase «scientific fraud by»

Wang was cleared of scientific fraud by his university, but new information brought to light today indicates at least one senior colleague had serious concerns about the affair.

Not exact matches

She said the research bill would «legalize fraud» by reducing the scientific evidence the government needs to approve existing drugs for new uses.

By assuming before any facts are known from the pathologist's death scene and toxicological report that any bedsharing baby was a victim of an accidental suffocation rather than from some congenital or natural cause, including SIDS unrelated to bedsharing, medical authorities not only commit a form of scientific fraud but they victimize the doomed infant's parents for a third time.

Cordova told the board that she «loved» the 14 - page report by the OIG, which investigates scientific misconduct as well as all manner of waste, fraud, and abuse involving NSF funds.

Pellegrino also related sentiments held by scientists who believe that because those who commit scientific fraud and research misconduct are in the minority, it is unnecessary to «change everything» for that small segment of the community.

... By making scientific researchers who publish in U.S. journals liable in tort for their acts of fraud, we would expect to deter the incidence of fraud before it occurs.

The package (which involved peer - review and separate editorial checking of key evidence and documents) also included an introduction by Deer, Piltdown medicine, explaining the fraud and comparing it with Britain's most notorious scientific forgery.

So let me see: Jones and Wigley get accused of scientific misconduct and fraud, publicly, based on a nonsense argument by Pat Michaels.

Combine that with huge profit - seeking pharmaceutical corporations, fly - by - night supplement companies that have active lawsuits being filed against them for fraud, millions of dollars in advertising and promotions on TV and the internet targeting vulnerable people, and endless layers of websites full of contradictory information about scientific trials, clinical tests, and potentially bogus health promises, and it's no wonder why people end up confused and frustrated.

Anyone who suggests otherwise simply does not understand the relevance of the scientific debate [think about Al Gore and claims that the debate is over and that anyone who disagrees too much with him apparently is a fraud or payed by oil companies or whatever...].

That is false warming they show, scientific fraud in my opinion, created by collusion among these three temperature sources.

In no cases, has any convincing evidence of fraud arisen, and his scientific work has been broadly supported by later studies.

Actually, there is a growing body of opinion that global warming is a fraud perpetrated by liberal politicians and their scientific acolytes who want more control over our lives.

While a direct accusation of scientific fraud may be actionable, challenges to scientific conclusions and interpretations of scientific studies are clearly protected by the First Amendment.

Since science is the pursuit of truth and AGW advocacy is anything but; it stands to reason that all efforts to keep the debate out of the scientific arena must be made by the global warming orthodoxy to keep the fraud alive.

If their time was funded by a grant for scientific research, they are guilty of fraud, as this is not science.

■ We also know that the myth of a scientific consensus belies the actual fact of an ideologically - driven consensus supported by fraud and corruption.

The New York Times published a doozy of a front - page story by John M. Broder on Wednesday on the Climate-gate scientific fraud scandal.

climate catastrophe fraud, and discuss its prevalence among specific populations, said groups to be defined by education in scientific method and practice in reasoned analysis?

My climate enemies have done scientific and other academic frauds; they've destroyed, withheld and pretended to misplace scientific data in order to prevent the human race discovering things about nature; they've forged documents to frame people they don't like; mendaciously and publicly accused innocent people of deplorable crimes that carry prison sentences; betrayed the trust reposed in their professions by fraudulently abrogating to themselves the magical competence to diagnose entire swathes of the (perfectly healthy) population with thought disorders just to score points in an academic bitch fight; deliberately and self - servingly lied to * massive * audiences about the way science itself works — than which I can't for the life of me think of a greater crime against humanity in the recent history of the developed world, can you Joe?

Jones and a collaborator have been accused by a climate change sceptic and researcher of scientific fraud for attempting to suppress data that could cast doubt on a key 1990 study on the effect of cities on warming â $ «a hotly contested issue.

But, as Watts Up With That reports new evidence unearthed by an inquisitive graduate student suggests that «ocean acidification» may be a scientific fraud to rank with the great «man - made - global warming» scare.

If your faith in today's scientific establishment was shaken recently by successive waves of fraud on the part of climate scientists — from systematically suppressing evidence of global cooling, to attempting to erase the Middle Ages, to falsely claiming the Himalayan glaciers were rapidly melting — get ready for more scientific corruption, a lot more.

And, that is the proof of the massive fraud perpetuated by a small number of climate scientists to keep the gravy train of Government climate research Grants coming (over $ 30 billion to date and no scientific proof that CO2 is harmful.

It will be a very interesting day when a major news reporting service publishes a series of stories detailing the fraud, proving the deception and debunking the lies perpetrated by hundreds of people globally who have pushed for various carbon taxes and trading credit markets (mostly for their own enrichment), based on the various questionable and outright wrong «scientific» studies which «proved» something was happening when it actually wasn't.

The only reason to highlight McI's reading of the paper (which can be read by anyone) is to highlight McI's conclusion («scientific fraud»), and apparently Mosher's back to his old «Piltdown Mann» position on climate science.

THIS must watch 5 minute video, backed up by peer - reviewed - scientific - evidence and verifiable government data, exposes the climate fraud rather masterfully...

Plaintiff's counsel falsely describes these reports as «a series of investigations and exonerations of Dr Mann» (pages 5 and 6 of January 18th memorandum), and falsely states that four university inquiries and five governmental agencies on both sides of the Atlantic have «conducted separate and independent investigations into the allegations of scientific misconduct against Dr Mann», and that «all of the above investigations found that there was no evidence of any fraud, data falsification, statistical manipulation, or misconduct of any kind by Dr Mann».

In a fundraising letter obtained by DeSmog before the conference, Fred Palmer had promoted the event as having the goal to «review the scientific and economic evidence that exposes the fraud inherent in the Obama - era regulation regime» while discussing «the overwhelming benefits of fossil fuels to us all.»

As the scientific world was rocked the past few days by the fraud and lies perpetrated by IPCC climate scientists, it should not be forgotten that lying, and other non-scientific methodologies, have been employed by various UN agencies to make ludicrous claims about human CO2 and climate change.

but rather, because he needs us to agree with his misanthropic policy wish list — by convincing us, somehow, that because there is only one «scientific consensus» there is therefore (and here the «fraud» happens) only one answer — his and his ilk's — which, however he parses, means an attack on the present development and therefore well being of the developed and the underdeveloped of this world.

«THE scientific consensus that mankind has caused climate change was rocked yesterday as a leading academic called it a «load of hot air underpinned by fraud».

Following a preparatory PR bombardment by think tanks and media spokespersons — often consisting of unsupported allegations of «fraud,» «plagiarism» or «scientific misconduct» supposedly committed by those evil climate scientists — the principle attack was launched: the so - called Climategate hack.

But a few days ago they published a blog article by Mark Steyn that calls Mann a scientific fraud.

He contacted his lawyer, who has sent a letter to The National Review saying they knowingly defamed him by accusing him of scientific fraud, and demanding an apology and that the defamatory article be taken down.

The «man - made hysteria» associated with the global - warming fraud is a real threat to mankind in the sense that it a) has the potential to, and in fact is, turning millions of gullible individuals into fanatical, anti-human ideologues, b) diverting precious time, money and resources that could be more usefully spent elsewhere into the ridiculous and unscientific attempts by environmental extremists to «control the climate» via enforced — through government legislation and burdensome taxes — behaviour modification of supposedly free citizens, and c) giving the practice of science a bad reputation amongst the general populace, which in turn has been a major contributing factor to the general decline in the understanding of basic scientific concepts, and reality in general, that we have been witnessing over the last 40 years or so (ex.

In an embarrassing display of scientific illiteracy and political gullibility, news organizations have repeatedly played into the deniers» hands: Implicitly endorsing their unfounded accusations of fraud against scientists whose emails were stolen, by portraying a single error in a thousand - page Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report as reason to question all of mainstream climate science.