Harvard Accused Of Research Fraud....

[Billy_Bob]

Harvard Accused Of Climate Research Fraud....

5 May 2015

Ms. Marge Dwyer, Harvard T.P. Chan School of Public Health

mhdwyer “at” hsph.harvard.edu

Dear Ms Dwyer:

Research-related fraud at Harvard institutions

A series of connected frauds surrounding research into climate change and related questions at Harvard has come to light because an environmental advocacy group had falsely accused Lord Monckton’s distinguished research colleague Dr Willie Wei-Hock Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics of having failed to disclose a funding conflict in a paper in the Science Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Dr Soon, like all his co-authors, had received no funding for his research into climate sensitivity modeling. That did not stop Dr Charles Alcock, the Center’s director, from allowing it to issue a statement alleging Dr Soon had failed to disclose a conflict of interest and claiming that it proposed to “investigate” him, when in fact it had itself negotiated a contract with Dr Soon’s funder for solar research that forbade it or Dr Soon to disclose the funder’s identity. Dr Soon had played no part in those negotiations. The Center alone was responsible. Dr Alcock also falsely told a journalist that the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics had no legal existence and alleged that, therefore, Dr Soon ought not to have described his affiliation as “Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics”, falsely implying that Dr Soon had improperly inflated his credentials.

Your name appears as the contact for a press release at Clean power plan health benefits hinge on policy decisions News Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, entitled Clean air and health benefits of clean power plan hinge on key policy decisions. The press release constitutes a gushing encomium of a commentary entitled US power plant carbon standards and clean air and health co-benefits by Charles T. Driscoll, Jonathan J. Buonocore, Jonathan I. Levy, Kathleen F. Lambert, Dallas Burtraw, Stephen B. Reid, Habibollah Fakhraei & Joel Schwartz, published on May 4, 2015, in Nature Climate Change: doi:10.1038/nclimate2598.

Two of the co-authors of the commentary, Buonocore and Schwartz, are researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Your press release quotes Buonocore thus: “If EPA sets strong carbon standards, we can expect large public health benefits from cleaner air almost immediately after the standards are implemented.” Indeed, the commentary and the press release constitute little more than thinly-disguised partisan political advocacy for costly proposed EPA regulations supported by the “Democrat” administration but opposed by the Republicans. Harvard has apparently elected to adopt a narrowly partisan, anti-scientific stance.

The commentary concludes with the words “Competing financial interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests”. Yet its co-authors have received these grants from the EPA: Driscoll $3,654,609; Levy $9,514,391; Burtraw $1,991,346; and Schwartz (Harvard) $31,176,575. The total is not far shy of $50 million.

Would the School please explain why its press release described the commentary in Nature Climate Change by co-authors including these lavishly-funded four as “the first independent, peer-reviewed paper of its kind”?

Would the School please explain why Mr Schwartz, a participant in projects grant-funded by the EPA in excess of $31 million, failed to disclose this material financial conflict of interest in the commentary?

Would the School please explain the double standard by which Harvard institutions have joined a chorus of public condemnation of Dr Soon, a climate skeptic, for having failed to disclose a conflict of interest that he did not in fact possess, while not only indulging Mr Schwartz, a climate-extremist, when he fails to declare a direct and substantial conflict of interest but also stating that the commentary he co-authored was “independent”?

Would the School please tell His Lordship, who has standing as Dr Soon’s lead author, how to lodge a complaint of research misconduct in respect of the massive, direct and undisclosed conflict of interest on the part of its researcher Mr Schwartz, and of the School’s misrepresentation of the commentary as “independent”?

Yours truly,

James Rowlatt

Clerk to Lord Monckton

Now this is going to get ugly. Climate Skeptics are now fighting back, naming names and revealing major funding conflicts of interest. Over 51 million to 4 Harvard researchers who FAILED TO DISCLOSE THEIR CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS.

Will the Harvard Chair respond to the allegations and pursue them as he did with Dr Soon? Wait, that is a bad analogy as the Harvard Chair is the one who made the contracts, not Soon, and then blames Soon for non disclosure after the Harvard Chair forbade him to disclose the source...

 

[Mad Scientist]

No way!

 

[Billy_Bob]

I'm not expecting Harvard to respond. Except for 55 gallon drums of white wash and excuse's up the ass...

 

[westwall]

The fraud runs too deep. They will hunker down, ignore all FOIA requests, and wait till people lose interest. In other words they will do what climatologists have been doing for the last 30 years.....lie cheat and steal to further their political agenda.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Yep, lets just defund it all and become Haiti. Instead of fixing the problems,,,we give up and go back on the farm.

Of course, working on a cure for cancer or a new way to move away space is probably fraud to you people.

You people make me sick.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The fraud runs too deep. They will hunker down, ignore all FOIA requests, and wait till people lose interest. In other words they will do what climatologists have been doing for the last 30 years.....lie cheat and steal to further their political agenda.

I was stunned at the money that those four have received. Over 51 million dollars from the EPA to say what they tell them too.. Why do we allow this gross misconduct to continue. Our government is supposed to be employed by us not to dictate demands.

I was stunned to see the amounts these people have received. The Culture of Corruption at the top of our government and our learned institutions.. This does not give me a warm fuzzy feeling, more like a nauseated vomit feeling..

 

[ScienceRocks]

Go after the people that commit the fraud. Don't kill our ability to compete in science! That would be a serious mistake.

 

[gipper]

It seems that everything is fraudulent in America today.

 

[DarkFury]

Yep, lets just defund it all and become Haiti. Instead of fixing the problems,,,we give up and go back on the farm.

Of course, working on a cure for cancer or a new way to move away space is probably fraud to you people.

You people make me sick.

That 51 MILLION went to fraud. If you truly want money for things such as NASA YOU NEED that money. That 51 MILLION IS half your request right?

 

[westwall]

Yep, lets just defund it all and become Haiti. Instead of fixing the problems,,,we give up and go back on the farm.

Of course, working on a cure for cancer or a new way to move away space is probably fraud to you people.

You people make me sick.

Quit your whining you little twerp. We don't want to defund everything. You sound like my 8 year old when she doesn't get her way and acts like a martyr. We want GOOD research to be done. Not the fraud they have been doing. If you were half as smart as you think you are you could figure that one out for yourself.

 

[Mr. H.]

Yep, lets just defund it all and become Haiti. Instead of fixing the problems,,,we give up and go back on the farm.

Of course, working on a cure for cancer or a new way to move away space is probably fraud to you people.

You people make me sick.

What "problems"?

 

[Muhammed]

Of course, working on a cure for cancer or a new way to move away space is probably fraud to you people.

You people make me sick.

How many billions of dollars that could have gone to cancer research or other actual scientific research were wasted on global warming bullshit?

Global warming nutters disgust me.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Harvard should just stay with what it does best: Making Napalm stick to kids.

 

[westwall]

Harvard should just stay with what it does best: Making Napalm stick to kids.

That or destroying companies. Have a company you want to see fail? Hire a Harvard MBA.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ah, here we go again. Cannot refute the research, go after the scientists, then the institutions of higher learning. What a bunch of redneck ignoramouses are posting here.

Grants are not handed out like paychecks. They have specific places for the money to go before the money is granted, and very little of it goes to the researcher. But none of you butt hurt fools would know that. They don't teach that in grade school.

Simple fact, Monkton and cohorts are frauds, from the claimed and nonexistant academic credentials to claimed Lordships, frauds and lies.

Once again, the affects of GHGs in the atmosphere is atmospheric physics. To understand what the affects are, one goes to an atmospheric physicist. Like Dr. James Hansen. Not to an obese junkie on the AM radio, an ex-TV weatherman that possesses no degree, or a fake British Lord.

 

[westwall]

Ah, here we go again. Cannot refute the research, go after the scientists, then the institutions of higher learning. What a bunch of redneck ignoramouses are posting here.

Grants are not handed out like paychecks. They have specific places for the money to go before the money is granted, and very little of it goes to the researcher. But none of you butt hurt fools would know that. They don't teach that in grade school.

Simple fact, Monkton and cohorts are frauds, from the claimed and nonexistant academic credentials to claimed Lordships, frauds and lies.

Once again, the affects of GHGs in the atmosphere is atmospheric physics. To understand what the affects are, one goes to an atmospheric physicist. Like Dr. James Hansen. Not to an obese junkie on the AM radio, an ex-TV weatherman that possesses no degree, or a fake British Lord.

Why that's a page right out of your playbook olfraud. Though, I must say...it's hilarious as hell to see you whine about it being used against you.. Truly it is!

 

[Billy_Bob]

Ah, here we go again. Cannot refute the research, go after the scientists, then the institutions of higher learning. What a bunch of redneck ignoramouses are posting here.

Impugning the poster. Check

Grants are not handed out like paychecks. They have specific places for the money to go before the money is granted, and very little of it goes to the researcher. But none of you butt hurt fools would know that. They don't teach that in grade school.

No facts like the letter presented to refute anything. Just an appeal to authority,, Check

Simple fact, Monkton and cohorts are frauds, from the claimed and nonexistant academic credentials to claimed Lordships, frauds and lies.

Impugning the the collector of the information rather than refute the information presented. Check

Once again, the affects of GHGs in the atmosphere is atmospheric physics. To understand what the affects are, one goes to an atmospheric physicist. Like Dr. James Hansen. Not to an obese junkie on the AM radio, an ex-TV weatherman that possesses no degree, or a fake British Lord.

And last but certainly not least, quote James Hansen and Michael Mann's failed hockey stick science that has been shown fraudulent over and over again. By the way Hansen is not an atmospheric scientist.. ETA: Come to think of it Neither is Mann..

Not once did you address the official misconduct by these people or the failure to disclose the sources of their massive funding as you were so giddy to do with Dr Soon. So why do you ignore your side for their misconduct yet with Dr Soon you are all up in yourself?

 

[Darkwind]

I can't find it, but I said nearly two years ago. Want to see what is behind global climate change? Follow the money.....


Oh look......

 

[Muhammed]

Ah, here we go again. Cannot refute the research, go after the scientists, then the institutions of higher learning.

What research are you speaking of? And why do you feel that it is relevant?