<h2>“Data Sleuth” detects data fraud</h2>Sholto David, a British scientist with a doctorate in cellular and molecular biology from Newcastle University has called out four prominent research scientists with Harvard Medical School's Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) for “data forgery.” Harvard Medical School is a teaching hospital.David, described by the New York Post as a “data sleuth,” made his accusations public with a January 2nd blog post naming DFCI's CEO Dr. Laurie Glimcher, COO Dr. William Hahn, Director of the Clinical Investigator Research Program Dr. Irene Ghobrial, and Jerome Lipper and Multiple Myeloma Center program director Dr. Kenneth Anderson in the alleged scandal.&nbsp;Cortney Weil, writing for The Blaze,[fn]Weil, Cortney. “Following Gay’s Resignation for Alleged Plagiarism, Doctors with Harvard Medical School Accused of Falsifying Research Data.” Blaze Media, Blaze Media, 23 Jan. 2024, <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/news/following-gay-s-resignation-for-alleged-plagiarism-doctors-with-harvard-medical-school-accused-of-falsifying-research-data" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">www.theblaze.com/news/following-gay-s-resignation-for-alleged-plagiarism-doctors-with-harvard-medical-school-accused-of-falsifying-research-data</a> [/fn] pointed out that David's post fell on the same day that Harvard President Claudine Gay resigned amid allegations of having committed 50 separate instances of plagiarism.<h3>Images manipulated</h3>According to David, images had been manipulated, and in some cases copied and pasted, in 57 published manuscripts. According to DFCI's Research Integrity Officer Barrett Rollins, as reported by The Harvard Crimson, the researchers have already retracted six papers with allegedly doctored images and will be correcting their work in 31 others.&nbsp;Rollins admitted that 38 papers had “potential errors,” claimed three had no errors, and stated that 16 contained research conducted by other laboratories not affiliated with the four scientists. Rollins added that DFCI has contacted, to the extent possible, the heads of those other laboratories to help them correct the papers. Three papers were said to already be under review before David's blog post.<h3>“Errors” not intentional?</h3>Although Harvard was concerned that the “errors” be corrected according to Weil, Rollins and David disputed the implications of the manipulations. Rollins did not agree that falsifying data was a breach of ethics, as David averred. Rollins claimed that errors are often unintentional and do not meet the criteria of misconduct. David, on the other hand, believes that so many errors by a cluster of scientists are anything but unintentional.<blockquote>Rollins . . &nbsp;cautioned that those errors may not have been as ethically egregious as David makes them out to be. "Presence of image discrepancies in a paper is not evidence of an author’s intent to deceive. That conclusion can only be drawn after a careful, fact-based examination which is an integral part of our response," Rollins insisted."Our experience is that errors are often unintentional and do not rise to the level of misconduct," he added.</blockquote><blockquote>David, however, stands by his work. "You’ve got a cluster of people at one institution with image problems," he said, according to U.S. News and World Report. "How many mistakes are we happy with people making and just kind of saying, 'That’s an innocent error'?" [Emphasis added].</blockquote>David called these acts of deception "the last resort of a failed scientist after every other trick failed to provide the desired result."&nbsp;<h3>Endemic integrity issues</h3>Are Harvard's ethics problems endemic? In addition to the data manipulation by the four scientists and allegations of plagiarism by its president, Harvard Business School put professor Francesca Gino on administrative leave last year after it was alleged that she, too, falsified data, the Washington Examiner reported.[fn]Thies, Breccan F. “Harvard Teaching Hospital to Retract Top Research Papers after Data Falsification Investigation.” Washington Examiner, 22 Jan. 2024, <a href="http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2811466/harvard-teaching-hospital-retract-research-papers-data-falsification/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2811466/harvard-teaching-hospital-retract-research-papers-data-falsification/</a> [/fn]&nbsp;<h2>“Publish or perish” behind data fraud</h2>Professors and scientists, under pressure to publish as a requisite for career advancement and to receive funding for projects, have long been known to succumb to various types of fraud. This hurts not just the doctors, researchers, and the public who rely on the data but, in the case of authorship fraud, the individuals who do the actual work and deserve the real credit.A student who experienced authorship fraud by professors wrote about the phenomenon for The Guardian.[fn]“‘My Professor Demands to Be Listed as an Author on Many of My Papers.’” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 5 June 2015, <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2015/jun/05/my-professor-demand-to-be-listed-author-on-research-paper" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2015/jun/05/my-professor-demand-to-be-listed-author-on-research-paper&nbsp;</a> [/fn] Providing insight into how the fraud occurs and how pervasive it is in the academic world, the student, remaining anonymous, wrote that it even goes as far as authors being listed on papers who may not even “be aware of the work being done.” The student revealed:<blockquote>The “publish or perish” motto of academic careers is true – and professors and group leaders take it seriously.It’s a vicious circle: the more papers you write, the faster your career progresses, and the more money you get from funding bodies. This means you can hire more people, who will publish more papers – which you can put your name to – progressing your career even further. A lot of well-known professors have groups so big that it is practically impossible for them to spend enough time on each project to warrant authorship of papers. Yet in most cases they still claim authorship.By the rules of my own university, my professor shouldn’t be listed as an author on many of my papers, but I still add him because he demands it.&nbsp;. . .&nbsp;There are people listed as authors on several of my papers who were unaware of the work being done. I know of a PhD student whose work was attributed to a postdoctoral researcher in his lab, but there was nothing he could do because the group leader was complicit in the fraud. (Emphases added.)</blockquote>Guest author for the journal Nature, neurologist Simon Gandevia, lamented how the pressure to publish leads to scientific misconduct:[fn]Gandevia, S. Publication pressure and scientific misconduct: why we need more open governance. Spinal Cord 56, 821–822 (2018). <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-018-0193-9" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-018-0193-9</a> [/fn] He stated:<blockquote>Not only has it been argued that most published research findings must be false [2], but statistical power is commonly low in the biomedical and clinical sciences. Perhaps not surprisingly then, the rate of translation of new findings to the clinic is slow and problematic [3]. Second, the number of papers retracted from the peer-reviewed literature is also increasing [4]. Third, there is an over-reliance on a scientist’s publication metrics (numbers, journal impact factors, citation numbers) for progression, promotion, prizes, and research grants. Indeed, gaming the metrics of science is an occupational requirement for scientists, journal staff and university administrators. Publications now contain more spin (reliance on findings which are not justified by the statistics) and more liberal use of words such as ‘novel’ [5]. These trends are driven by an unhealthy culture in which it can be more important to publish a result than publish a correct result [6, 7]. The trends also expose deep flaws in the current systems of peer review. [Emphases added].</blockquote>The pressure to “publish or perish” is not just a phenomenon in Western nations, as Polish researchers, Pazura-Czachura, et al, set out to confirm in their review of two studies on the subject.[fn]Paruzel-Czachura, M., Baran, L., &amp; Spendel, Z. (2021). Publish or be ethical? Publishing pressure and scientific misconduct in research. Research Ethics, 17(3), 375-397. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120980562" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120980562</a> [/fn]&nbsp;They wrote, in their paper titled, “Publish or be ethical? Publishing pressure and scientific misconduct in research:"<blockquote>We understand publication pressure, or pressure to collect points (Haven et al., 2019a, 2019b), or “pointing pressure” in Poland, as: Subjectively perceived psychological tension that is related to the requirement for a particular number of publications in a specified timeframe, which attests to one’s academic development, and is a condition of maintaining one’s position or even retaining one’s job. In the literature, this pressure has been referred to as “point-mania”, “impactophrenia”, or “pointosis” (Kulczycki, 2017) whereby greater value is attached to the number of publications or points (either publications or points are collected, depending on the country) than to the quality of research work . . . [Emphases added].</blockquote>The conclusion of their study, as noted in their abstract, is that scientists who experience pressure are more likely to engage in fraud in the future:&nbsp;<blockquote>The primary conclusions are: (1) most scholars are convinced of their morality and predict that they will behave morally in the future; (2) scientific misconduct, particularly minor offenses such as honorary authorship, is frequently observed both by researchers (particularly in their colleagues) and by their managers; (3) researchers experiencing publication pressure report a willingness to engage in scientific misconduct in the future. [Emphases added].</blockquote><h2>Big Pharma unduly influences medical research</h2>Another factor in data fraud is that researchers who rely on pharmaceutical funding for their grant money (which many university professors and institutional researchers do) feel the need to provide their benefactors with the “desired” results in order to receive continued funding in the future.Dr. Marcia Angell, &nbsp;a member of Harvard Medical School’s Department of Global Health and Social Medicine and the former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, explained how Big Pharma has gained undue influence over medical research in her book <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/3901/the-truth-about-the-drug-companies-by-marcia-angell-md/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Truth About the Drug Companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it</a>. Retired geriatric physician Fred Charatan reviewed her book for the BMJ,[fn]Charatan F. The Truth About the Drug Companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it. BMJ. 2004 Oct 9;329(7470):862. PMCID: PMC521592[/fn] noting that Angell drew attention to the use of third-party contract research organizations&nbsp;(CROs) to control research findings:&nbsp;<blockquote>Among the many wiles exposed are big pharma's use of contract research organisations to exert undue influence over clinical research . . . &nbsp;[Emphasis added].</blockquote><h3>FDA complicit</h3>The FDA often fails to notify the public or scientific journals when it discovers research fraud in clinical trials, thereby enabling publication fraud. Investigative journalist Maryann Demasi, in a paper published by the BMJ,[fn]Demasi, Maryanne. “FDA Oversight of Clinical Trials Is ‘Grossly Inadequate,’ Say Experts.” The BMJ, British Medical Journal Publishing Group, 16 Nov. 2022, <a href="http://www.bmj.com/content/379/bmj.o2628" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">www.bmj.com/content/379/bmj.o2628</a> [/fn] states that this is a longstanding problem, predating COVID-19 and is not only due to lack of inspections. It is also a result of failure to notify the public and journals once the fraud is detected:<blockquote>Now, facing a backlog of site inspections, experts have criticised the FDA’s oversight of clinical trials, describing it as “grossly inadequate.” They say the problem, which predated covid-19, is not limited to a lack of inspections but also includes failing to notify the public or scientific journals when violations are identified—effectively keeping scientific misconduct from the medical establishment. (Emphasis added.)</blockquote><h2>Who will be the first to do something about research fraud?</h2>Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the Lancet, stated that perhaps as much as 50% of all published research is fraudulent. This was his perception, after having attended a symposium in London in 2015 on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research, where <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham_House_rule" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Chatham House rules</a> were observed. Writing about what they all knew but wouldn't admit publicly, he stated:[fn]Horton, Richard. “Offline: What is Medicine’s 5 sigma?” The Lancet, vol. 385, no. 9976, 11 Apr. 2015, p. 1380, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60696-1" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60696-1</a> [/fn]<blockquote>“A lot of what is published is incorrect.” I’m not allowed to say who made this remark because we were asked to observe Chatham House rules. We were also asked not to take photographs of slides. Those who worked for government agencies pleaded that their comments especially remain unquoted, since the forthcoming UK election meant they were living in “purdah”—a chilling state where severe restrictions on freedom of speech are placed on anyone on the government’s payroll. Why the paranoid concern for secrecy and non-attribution? Because this symposium—on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research, held at the Wellcome Trust in London last week—touched on one of the most sensitive issues in science today: the idea that something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations.</blockquote><blockquote>[P]erhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest . . . science has taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put it, “poor methods get results”. . . . In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors . . . . love of “significance” pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale. We reject important confirmations. . . .Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent, endpoints that foster reductive metrics, such as high-impact publication. National assessment procedures, such as the Research Excellence Framework, incentivise bad practices. And individual scientists, including their most senior leaders, do little to alter a research culture that occasionally veers close to misconduct.. . .</blockquote><blockquote>The conclusion of the symposium was that something must be done. . . . &nbsp;precisely what to do or how to do it, there were no firm answers. Those who have the power to act seem to think somebody else should act first. . . .The good news is that science is beginning to take some of its worst failings very seriously. The bad news is that nobody is ready to take the first step to clean up the system. &nbsp;[Emphases added].</blockquote>Publishing house Elsevier, in a November 2023 article by Ann-Marie Roche,[fn]Roche, Ann-Marie. “Fighting the Problem of Fraud in Publishing.” Www.Elsevier.Com, Elsevier, 20 Nov. 2023, <a href="http://www.elsevier.com/connect/fighting-the-problem-of-fraud-in-publishing" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">www.elsevier.com/connect/fighting-the-problem-of-fraud-in-publishing</a>[/fn] explained that Elsevier is working to eliminate fraud in publishing. Elsevier publishes 2,800 journals and employs a Research Integrity and Ethics team that is moving to a proactive stance to identify fraudulent papers before they are published.<blockquote>“It's really important to shift from a reactive stance to a proactive stance, to be able to identify issues pre-acceptance — that's key,” says Dr Daniel Stuckey, also a Senior Publishing Ethics Expert on the team. Dr Stuckey emphasizes the importance of the ethics team working with authors, editors and reviewers to ensure they are knowledgeable about Elsevier’s policies and standards:We are developing resources to be shared externally, and this is to help train researchers — early career researchers, for example — on best practice so they know the kinds of ethical pitfalls to avoid and our recommendations for being able to construct or formulate really clear, transparent and well-reported research that can then be submitted for publication. (Emphases aded.)</blockquote>Perhaps Harvard will become part of the solution and start its own clean-up.

Data sleuth.jpg

US News

Medical

Does the pressure to 'publish or perish' and please Big Pharma create a publication culture of fraud?

Prominent Harvard Medical School research scientists accused of 'data fraud'

<h2>Move over book burning, hello de-platforming?</h2>Closed out of your Facebook or Instagram account? Maybe your website suddenly disappeared, or your YouTube channel was demonetized or deleted? Perhaps you lost access to thousands of hours of posts and videos you produced, and your years of work were gone in an instant? That's de-platforming; the modern version of book burning, a “punishment” for going against the mainstream narrative. And, the censorship doesn't stop with social media, it includes PayPal accounts and more.<h3>Getting up again</h3>How do individuals who went afoul of the globalists, who didn't keep quiet and let others do their thinking for them, respond when they find themselves de-platformed by social media companies and other services? Here's what London Real's Brian Rose, Americas Frontline Doctor founder Dr. Simone Gold, and independent researcher James Roguski did to pick themselves up and continue their work despite the heavy-handed censorship they experienced.Brian RoseWhen London Real YouTuber Brian Rose publicly began trying to understand COVID-19 and its countermeasures, he soon found his entire life seemingly deleted from the internet by the social media giants.&nbsp;Not only did he lose all his years of work, amounting to thousands of videos which he had uploaded to the internet. He also lost access to his Paypal account, and more, because in his search for the truth about the pandemic; his counter-narrative interviews with David Icke were too dangerous for the globalists to allow. &nbsp;In his below documentary, Rose&nbsp;recounts his experiences and how he ultimately started a channel of his own. He explains that he was wholly unprepared for what happened on May 3, 2020, even though he knew that many would want to stop the interview (@about 3:36):<blockquote>Over the past few weeks, our entire world has been transformed. Everything we took for granted has now been taken away and our freedoms have been replaced with fear. All those rights we fought centuries for have been handed over without a second thought.&nbsp;We all process fear in different ways. I cope by immersing myself in my work and today my job is to ask questions. One million people will be watching and they all want answers.&nbsp;Countless others are trying to stop this from happening. At any moment they can walk through that door or lock this broadcast. I'm scared but I don't know what else to do. I prepared my whole life for a moment like This. But nothing would prepare me for what happened next. . .</blockquote>&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">WATCH THE MOVIE THAT YouTube DOES NOT Want YOU TO SEE (and SHARE IT Far And Wide ) <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LondonReal?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LondonReal</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WeWillNotBeSilenced?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WeWillNotBeSilenced</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/StopCensorship?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#StopCensorship</a> <a href="https://t.co/txcVpjPDWz">https://t.co/txcVpjPDWz</a>— Brian Rose, Founder &amp; Host of London Real (@LondonRealTV) <a href="https://twitter.com/LondonRealTV/status/1796285778517221575?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 30, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>&nbsp;Dr. Simone GoldDr. Simone Gold, founder of <a href="https://www.aflds.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">America's Frontline Doctors</a>, was one of the first doctors to understand that how she was being told to treat COVID patients wasn't normal. Very alarmed at what was taking place she, along with other doctors, held the “<a href="https://www.whitecoatsummit.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">White Coat Summit</a>” on July 27, 2020, as well as a press conference on the Supreme Court steps. As she tweeted below, the press conference went viral, garnering millions of views before Big Tech and Big Media took the video down.She concluded by explaining their purpose and the result:<blockquote>Our fight was to show America the propaganda vs the truth, and then we were censored.</blockquote>&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Our press conference in front of the Supreme Court on July 27th, 2020 was a turning point in the fight against COVID Tyranny. After 20 million views in 8 hours, Big Tech colluded to wipe the video from online platforms. We knew in this moment that we would win the fight. <a href="https://t.co/9CP0Ogpnfp">pic.twitter.com/9CP0Ogpnfp</a>— Dr. Simone Gold (@drsimonegold) <a href="https://twitter.com/drsimonegold/status/1610416861723729921?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 3, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Dr. Gold continues to <a href="https://aflds.org/about-us" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">advance</a> the mission of America's Frontline Doctors, to protect medical freedom and civil liberties.'James RoguskiIndependent researcher James Roguski who, <a href="http://jamesroguski.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">according</a> to his website, has been calling out lies and propaganda for decades, found years of work gone when the company that hosted most of his websites terminated his account for what they said were “terms of service” violations. It did not deter him from continuing his work, either.<blockquote>They deleted many of my websites, but they ignited my passion to burn even brighter. I now have most of my work on Substack.&nbsp;</blockquote>Roguski is interested in building a holistic alternative to the WHO and <a href="https://jamesroguski.substack.com/about" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">recruits</a> others to join him.<blockquote>The old system is crumbling, and I intend to help speed its demise, but we must build its replacement quickly.If you are fed up with the government, hospital, medical, pharmaceutical, media, industrial complex and would like to help , then feel free to contact me directly anytime.</blockquote>&nbsp;The information contained in this article is for educational and information purposes only and is not intended as health, medical, financial or legal advice. Always consult a physician, lawyer or other qualified professional regarding any questions you may have about a medical condition, health objectives, or legal issues.&nbsp;Related articles:<ul><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/covid-sceptics-won-out-globalists-fear-an-increasingly-disbelieving-public" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">'COVID skeptics won out' — Globalists fear an increasingly disbelieving public</a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/colorado-governor-signs-off-on-bill-establishing-state-ministry-of-truth-students-atarget-of-new-law">Colorado governor signs off on bill establishing state 'ministry of truth'? Students a target of new law</a></li></ul>

account suspended.jpg

Censorship

Globalism

How three individuals got up again after being de-platformed

Who's afraid of Big Bad Tech? 

A British vigilante group known as the “Blade Runners” is receiving widespread support from British taxpayers as it continues to destroy climate surveillance cameras across London.<h2>The ULEZ mandate</h2>By order of London Mayor Sadiq Khan, the city is peppered with ultra-low emission zones (ULEZs), areas accessible only to low-emission vehicles. Cars that do not meet the city’s environmental standards are charged £12.50 ($16) for entering the ULEZ. Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras positioned around the zones read license plates and check them against the vehicles’ make and model in real time. If a vehicle does not meet the environmental threshold, a fine is levied against the car owner.&nbsp;The ULEZ climate mandate has drawn heavy&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/london-hundreds-protest-against-climate-mandates">protests</a> from residents, including&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/british-veteran-launches-hunger-strike-as-unrest-grows-over-climate-mandates">hunger strikes</a> and refusals to pay fines. Taxpayers have also taken to disabling the ANPR surveillance cameras which Transport for London (TfL), the city’s transportation department, said will be used both for climate and law enforcement.<h2>Taxpayers cheer the ‘Blade Runners’</h2>Since the climate restrictions were expanded last year, the Blade Runners have taken to disabling and destroying hundreds of cameras. Between April and September 2023, Metropolitan Police recorded 200 reports of cameras being stolen and 595 reports of cameras being vandalized.TfL began placing black boxes around ULEZ camera wirings to protect them from being cut, but taxpayers found other ways to disable the cameras — like removing them completely.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"> MUST SEE: Blade Runners topple THREE ULEZ cameras in a coordinated strike… The people are fighting back! <a href="https://t.co/Yvr2Xr7Lun">pic.twitter.com/Yvr2Xr7Lun</a>— David Morgan #StayFree (@david_r_morgan) <a href="https://twitter.com/david_r_morgan/status/1802726912050995623?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>In response, the city&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/london-taxpayers-attack-surveillance-vans-in-continued-revolt">deployed</a> mobile surveillance vans mounted with ANPR cameras across London in the hopes of evading attacks, but Blade Runners soon began targeting those as well. Some surveillance vans have been spotted covered in graffiti with their tires slashed, while others have been completely covered in tarp.Last month, 21 cameras were destroyed in the hours after Sadiq Khan was re-elected mayor of London, the&nbsp;Daily Mail&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13538797/Moment-Blade-Runner-uses-power-tool-cut-ULEZ-camera-traffic-light-latest-attack-Sadiq-Khans-hated-scheme.html">reported</a>. Last weekend, Blade Runners used power tools to topple a ULEZ camera and traffic lights to the delight of some fellow taxpayers. In a video that was posted to social media, passing cars can be heard honking in support.The video received over 37,000 likes. Comments on the post were largely supportive, with users writing that, “When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty,” and “Fair play to them, it's a complete scam that does nothing.”Blade Runner Matt Hardy told the&nbsp;Daily Mail&nbsp;that the Blade Runners are “people pissed off about the tyranny reigning over us and getting out and doing things about it – real votes, real boys here.”<h2>‘These cameras are not about the climate. They are about control’</h2>British actor and influencer Laurence Fox said this week he was just given back his electronic devices by police after being arrested earlier this year for cheering on the Blade Runners:<blockquote>These cameras are not about the climate. They are about control. They are the primary infrastructure for all sorts of things that ideologues like the midget dictator [Sadiq Khan] would like to impose upon us.I can now finally say the word ‘Bladerunners’ again. One of the ridiculous restrictions on free speech imposed by the police.It’s a dreadful shame to see so many of these cameras dying suddenly. I’m not at all thrilled about it. Just because I am smiling like a Cheshire Cat, it doesn’t mean that I am over the moon that these scameras continue to topple in high winds.&nbsp;Vive la résistance!</blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">POLICE UPDATE Following 6 coppers bursting into my house earlier this year to arrest me for saying how pleased I was that the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ULEZ?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ULEZ</a> scam was meeting such robust resistance, this morning the <a href="https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@metpoliceuk</a> were ordered by the magistrate to hand back all my devices, including my…— Laurence Fox (@LozzaFox) <a href="https://twitter.com/LozzaFox/status/1803030521095622912?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 18, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div> &nbsp;

ulez sign camera.jpg

Pushback_Resistance

Climate Change

‘Pissed off about the tyranny reigning over us’

British taxpayers cheer vigilante group destroying climate cams

Fisker is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, the electric vehicle (EV) company announced Tuesday.<h2>‘Like other companies in the electric vehicle industry’</h2>“Fisker has made incredible progress since our founding, bringing the Ocean SUV to market twice as fast as expected in the auto industry and making good on our promises to deliver the most sustainable vehicle in the world,” a spokesperson <a href="https://assets.ctfassets.net/cghen8gr8e1n/6W19OiEBJDVIFVEmo4feHA/df902c5cb2b067251a300efb0b35f611/Fisker-Filing-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a>.The California-based company added it is not the only EV maker that has been struggling to stay in business.“We are proud of our achievements, and we have put thousands of Fisker Ocean SUVs in customers’ hands in both North American [sic] and Europe. But like other companies in the electric vehicle industry, we have faced various market and macroeconomic headwinds that have impacted our ability to operate efficiently. After evaluating all options for our business, we determined that proceeding with a sale of our assets under Chapter 11 is the most viable path forward for the company.”Fisker’s collapse is the latest indication that the EV industry is folding due to sinking demand. Other EV industry players are also cutting their losses as they jump ship.<h2>Hertz</h2>In March, Hertz CEO Stephen Scherr&nbsp;<a href="https://www.motorfinanceonline.com/news/hertz-ceo-resigns-amid-ev-investment-setback/#:~:text=Scherr's%20departure%20coincides%20with%20Hertz's,electric%20vehicle%20(EV)%20rentals">resigned</a> after his bet on EVs cost the car rental giant its biggest quarterly loss since 2020. Hertz had been praised by the Biden administration for its ambition to convert 25% of its fleet to EVs by the end of this year. In January, however, the company announced it would instead be selling its 20,000 EVs — including Teslas — at heavily discounted prices and replacing them with gas-powered cars.<h2>Mercedes-Benz</h2>Mercedes-Benz also recently had to give up its ambition to only sell electric cars by 2030. Instead, EVs are expected to make up only 50% of the German carmaker’s sales over the next decade.<h2>Apple</h2>In February, Apple abandoned its multi-billion dollar effort to create an electric car. Despite being a decade in the works and employing 2,000 people, Project Titan was axed due to falling consumer demand.<h2>Aston Martin</h2>A lack of consumer demand is also partly to blame for Aston Martin&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13138123/Aston-Martin-puts-brakes-new-electric-supercar-2026-bosses-say-drivers-want-engines-throaty-roar.html">placing</a> its battery-operated “supercar” on hold until 2026.“Demand, certainly at an Aston Martin price point, is not what we thought it was going to be two years ago,” said Aston Martin Executive Chairman Lawrence Stroll.&nbsp;<h2>Ford</h2>In December, Ford slashed production of its flagship EV at its assembly plant in Dearborn, Michigan by half. The automaker cut the monthly production quote for the all-electric F-150 Lightning pickup truck from 3,200 units to 1,600 units per month.<h2>Biden administration continues to force EV production</h2>Nevertheless, the Biden administration in March issued new climate mandates aimed at forcing more EV production. The new rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contain tight emissions standards that will&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/epa-electric-vehicles-emissions-limits-climate-biden-e6d581324af51294048df24269b5d20a">require</a> 56% of new vehicle sales to be fully electric by 2032, with an additional 13% required to be hybrids.

car market decline.jpg

Biden administration continues to force EV production

Electric car company files bankruptcy as EV market folds

For the last two years, British authorities have been testing AI-powered emotion recognition cameras on travelers in train stations, according to recently disclosed documents.<h2>What can the cameras see?</h2>In each of eight train stations around the UK, five to seven cameras or sensors scan the passing crowds. Using AI software from Amazon, the cameras use object recognition algorithms to spot criminal activity, trespassing, weapons, wet floors, overcrowding, and overstuffed trash cans.&nbsp;They can also alert authorities when passengers engage in “unusual behavior,” such as shouting, running, smoking, or skateboarding.&nbsp;A combination of existing cameras and newly installed smart cameras are being used for the surveillance project. All are equipped with Amazon’s Rekognition surveillance system.<h2>Emotional recognition</h2>Through a combination of facial and behavioral analyses, the Rekognition software allows officials to also <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-ai-cameras-emotions-uk-train-passengers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">analyze visitors’ emotions</a>. Internal documents note that the cameras can detect whether a passenger is “happy, sad [or] angry.” They can also recognize passenger satisfaction, which “could be utilized to maximum advertising and retail revenue.”<h2>Anti-social behavior</h2>Authorities can also detect passengers who exhibit “anti-social behaviour,” which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/asb/asb/antisocial-behaviour/what-is-antisocial-behaviour/">according</a> to London’s Metropolitan Police Service means “behaviour by a person which causes, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to persons not of the same household as the person.”<h2>Social distancing, face masks, and demographics</h2>Other&nbsp;<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24757655-usecases_dpas_review_managed_stations?responsive=1&amp;title=1">use cases</a> for the surveillance cameras include detecting whether passengers are keeping to social distancing rules and wearing face masks. The cameras can also scan for demographics by identifying people’s age profiles and “socio-economic classification,” which the documents note can create “revenue opportunities for better targeted advertising and product placement.”<h2>‘Quite a concerning step’</h2>The documents were obtained by Big Brother Watch, a civil rights and government watchdog group, in response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request. Network Rail, a body within the Department of Transportation which manages most of the country’s train network, has been overseeing the surveillance project.&nbsp;“The rollout and normalization of AI surveillance in these public spaces, without much consultation and conversation, is quite a concerning step,” Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-ai-cameras-emotions-uk-train-passengers/">told</a> Wired.As of now, the surveillance systems do not use facial recognition technology, which analyzes faces and matches them against facial images stored in certain databases.

Prominent Harvard Medical School research scientists accused of 'data fraud'

Does the pressure to 'publish or perish' and please Big Pharma create a publication culture of fraud?

Related Articles

Europe may subject travelers to lie detector tests

FBI intimidated nurse who exposed hospital’s child mutilation practices, report reveals

Just 2 in 10 Biden supporters think marriage and kids are important for society. Why?

Couples sue Vermont for requiring gender ideology in foster care

Latest Articles

Who's afraid of Big Bad Tech?

British taxpayers cheer vigilante group destroying climate cams

Electric car company files bankruptcy as EV market folds

UK tests emotion recognition cameras in train stations