Pyshnov

1. I thank Erin for staying on principles. I know well that he will have to sustain more pressure. I guess there will be even attempts to decivilize this discussion in order to erase it from Internet. But, there are some signs that some people do want me to talk: The Chronicle of Higher Education on its forum allowed two of my postings recently!!! This is the URL: http://chronicle.com/forums/colloquy/read.php?f=1&i=4298&t=4298 Their theme is - stealing authorship of graduate research, they ask directly in these words: how your mentor becomes a thief? Go to this forum and read it before you post here. People there talk more or less openly on this formerly prohibited subject. 2. I am disappointed that debate here goes around believing or not believing me only. I would be happy if these questions were asked: Can you do this....as grad. student? Can university do this...? 3. So far, grad. students are in subservience. I think for several reasons, and first reason is in that a thesis becomes drastically less and less an original work of science. What would you defend as you right of authorship when there is so little originalty there? And I am not saying that experiments that your prof told you to do are more brilliantly conceived, no. Second reason comes again from the first reason: the prof is trying to puff up his authority because he has little of substance. You say it relates to only a few profs, but I say: to many, and their number grows. The third reason is that university business follows corporate rules: secrecy, censorship, exterminating dissidents. In Canada there is no law protecting whistleblowers, there is no law making universities accountable for public money they use, and so, corporate fraud in Can.academia sees a green light. 4. Chemmaine, I could not move on, period. Roughly speaking, half of it because I was stopped at every move, another half - my condition was and is - complete desperation. My research was not an episode. that was the thing I did for 20 years before, trying to understand how cells divide in the organism. (No, you don't have to believe me, there are papers published, first - in 1969.) Cheers, may be we are getting somewhere if you drop the compassion topic, I didn't ask for compassion, did you notice this? Michael Pyshnov.

Dragonfinity, Your passion goes too high for me to conduct further discussion. However, I am kind of obliged to reply this time since others may take my silence in a wrong way. 1. You first said that nobody believes my story except myself. I posted in my previous message the part of the letter from GSU (that's from more than one individual) showing that you are wrong. You had to click on the thumbnail to read the text. Now you say: "Show me some evidence that a real person of influence believes you." You imply that GSU has not enough influence? Just how much influence would you need? No, that's not a fair game, you would never be satisfied with the degree of influence, I don't start your game. For the other participants, however, I would refer to two letters (my doc. 30 and 33) from The President of The Canadian Genetics Society (sounds influential?) and another prof. describing the details of plagiarism and rejecting the UofT investigation of it. 2. What you call my "story" is actually all in the documents. So, it's rather a matter of reading these documents. Do not try to say that this is a matter of "believing" me. 3. Your passion in trashing me is too much for you to remain at the same time a good attorney. An attorney can not just trash somebody, he has to show objectivity and credibility. But you do this: you allow the possibility that my story is true, by saying: "Even if things are how you claim them to be..." But, a paragraph earlier, you allowed yourself to say to me "you try to spread lies and rumors". My dear attorney, these things don't go together. You do not accuse me of lying when I might be right. 4. You say: "Your case is out of appeals". This is what the appeals were: First UofT investigation was done without me, I learned about it two years later. In the second UofT investigation no biologist was present. The Govt. investigation said they did not investigate, just relied on second UofT investigation. That's why I am out of appeals in Canadian academia. However, in court it is different. The law says that as long as the unlawful publication is in libraries and can be offered to readers I have a case. That's unless you go around the world and mutilate scientific journals. 5. You stress that I am bitter and old. What does it have to do with the case? It's called "irrelevant considerations" and not respected by court at all. You, without any examples, say that I "trick" students, "using them". If an attorney says such things in court and, as you do, does not rely on any substance and fact, he would loose all credibility. You are telling the students that they are overly compassionate. But you apparently are an attorney working not for students, but for the university. If so, they should be very apprehensive. I, indeed, am not the man I was. I could not imagine that this can happen, I was like your students today. ------------ This is for the students, from my other posting: In July 2001, a US court said that PhD supervisor has fiduciary obligations toward a student researcher. See: http://law.duke.edu/journals/dltr/articles/2001dltr0035.html http://stblaw.lawoffice.com/CM/Memos/memos911.asp http://www.nacua.org/jcul/JCUL_Without_Hyperlinks/29_JCUL_153.doc One important application here is in that fiduciary is prohibited to compete with his beneficiary. A PhD student is required to produce an original work of science, and a supervisor has knowledge of this work. Therefore, if supervisor wants to contribute another piece of original science to this work, he must make a formal request to do so, otherwise supervisor can not claim any of this work as his own, period. Other applications: highest standard of honesty, complete disclosure of all actions, etc. All of it seems reasonable, and, as the cases continue to mount, necessary. Why the governmental offices, universities, AAAS, NIH, etc., are not putting fiduciary duties into their corresponding regulations and codes of behaviour? Michael Pyshnov.

Dragonfinity, you say: "My comments are based on the fact that I doubt the truth of his story. While I am sure that HE believes it, no one else does." Are you sure that "no one else does"? Don't you show a disrespect for other participants of this discussion? This is from the letter written by Graduate Students' Union (my document #34): GSU.gif

I quote: >Pyshnov's motivation for the post was not to warn others of the possible pit falls of grad school. It was solely to create more awareness of his own personal cause. A simple google search of his name will show you that he's posted to hundreds of forums with basically the same statements. >He won't even show up here again. He doesn't care one bit about any of us. Instead, he is willing to hurt those here who are interested in programs that U. Toronto has to offer. >I am surprised by the lack of street smarts for such intelligent people. >I apologize if this sounds rude or harsh, but I am really offended that Pyshnov would post this here. ---------- So, my motivation is under attack. Am I not helping others if I create more awareness of my own personal case? What do you mean by "street smarts"? Someones who, according to your idea, must be able, by using psychological deductions, to redirect attention of others from the facts and documents to the "motivation" behind the posting of these documents? Unfortunately, "street smarts" prevail in society today. Unfortunately, they prevail even in universities. Facts no longer play any role. And, that's what my web site and my postings are complaining of. I still say: read the documents, they will help you, they will also help you to understand the enormous harm that "street smarts" have caused to society and to the science. With "street smarts" in control, it became virtually impossible to form an impartial jury in courts; all attention is in politics, psychology, sociology. Unbelievable "justifications" are taken seriously. "Social justice" has killed the justice. Science is equally perverted: while not a singe disease can be cured, "breakthroughs" promissing clinical trials in 2 to 5 years are reported every week, but are never heard of again. University of Toronto with its army of street smart scientists has become a dumping ground for the hundreds of millions in public money disguised as "private donations" (read: tax shelters) from a group of multy-billionaries who, in fact, dictate its politics and who stronly favor street smarts (read: plagiarists) over real scientists. Wake up. Dump the street smarts! Choose the doers! My web site is good for you! Michael Pyshnov.

Hi! I did little except what I did in biology, so, there is not much I can tell about myself. I still remain the only person who knows how cells divide in the organism. I had no chance to "popularize" my knowledge. I am for years in a horrible depression (although I have relatively comfortable life thanks to the material support from my wife) and under the devilish provocation. Science is in the very wrong hands today. If you go to sci. and edu. you need to read my documents, what they say in replay to my complaints, to learn the language of fraud. Michael Pyshnov.

This is what now can happen to anyone: Please, see my web site - "University of Toronto fraud" http://ca.geocities.com/uoftfraud/ This site gives over 50 documents exposing unprecedented fraud going on in Canadian academia. Briefly: My PhD research of five years was stolen by my supervisor who, a few months before this, fraudulently changed my status to "lapsed student" and so removed me from the University. She published, in American journals, three papers claiming credit for my discoveries, then, said that my discoveries belong to "community" and she simply "salvaged" them. She characterized me as "a man of proven scholarly attainments" and "a very creative scientist", but her envy and hatred has put an end to my career. The documents show her pathological dishonesty. The University has admitted that she "repeated" my experiments and "replicated or extended" my results, that she did not acknowledge this fact, and that my research was, in fact, based on theoretical paper published by me before I came to this university. Yet, these investigations ended with the conclusion that she did not steal my research. Five other professors and University of Toronto President participated in the fraud and obstruction of justice. The fraud was followed by the largest cover-up in history. Over one hundred of organizations, govt. offices, law firms, etc. were corrupted and made to cooperate with the perpetrators of the fraud. The Government repeatedly refused to give me the constitutionally guaranteed equal protection of the Law and any help whatsoever. This story is prohibited for publication in Canada's media for political reasons, and the fraud is continuing. Such journals as Science, Nature, Chronicle of Higher Education would not publish a single word of this affair, amazingly, having lost all interest in the integrity of scientific research. I have no means of getting back the authorship of my research. No job has been available to me for 18 years. My protest that continued for nine months at the University campus was ended through harassment by the University police. IT'S TIME TO STOP THIS FRAUD. IT'S TIME TO STOP THE CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE. Michael Pyshnov.