Don’t mess with Fatih Sen
Fake nanotechnology is always fun, but it does get extreme here. Word of advice: if you are in Turkey, better don’t point fingers at Professor Fatih Sen’s research. Things get broken easily.
By Leonid Schneider, on research integrity, biomedical ethics and academic publishing
Fake nanotechnology is always fun, but it does get extreme here. Word of advice: if you are in Turkey, better don’t point fingers at Professor Fatih Sen’s research. Things get broken easily.
“it makes more sense when you have consumed twice the recommended dose of San Pedro cactus and spent four hours staring at paisley wallpaper, or so I hear from a friend.” – Smut Clyde.
This is a guest post by two whistleblowers from the Palacky University in Olomouc. In the centre of the growing research misconduct and retaliation scandal: the nanotechnology professor Radek Zboril
How can EU Flagships help with coronavirus pandemic? Human Brain Project offers IT power and cigarettes, while Graphene Flagship established a COVID-19 Task Force. With Francesco “Stripy” Stellacci as virology expert!
“A complex fraud involving a Greek scientist and her network of international researchers has been uncovered by investigators from the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF).”
Mauro Ferrari was made to resign as ERC president. In his 3 months in office, he published a ridiculously fraudulent paper with Houston colleagues. Now Ferrari announces from his Texas lockdown “trenches” to cure COVID-19.
COVID-19 pandemic is a good occasion to reassess our attitude to research fraud. Smut Clyde will show you some nanotechnologists who specialise on fabricating vaccine research data in Photoshop.
The world is in the grip of COVID-19 pandemic. Thousands dead, infection rates explode, nations in lockdown. Perfect timing for troll scientists to offer their bullshit cures. Like Thomas Webster of Northeastern University.
Linköping University has another potential research misconduct case, again in material sciences. Four papers by LiU professors Ömer Nur and Magnus Willander are questioned on PubPeer
A Chinese paper gets rejected at Elsevier after reviewer spotted fraud. Same paper re-appears unchanged in another Elsevier journal, the editors refuse any action.









