🚀 go-pugleaf

About the "Baltimore Affair" (data falsified in publication):
The appearance of an interview with Imanishi-Kari fills one
hole in the story, but another hole remains.

The interview was published in the Science section of yesterday's
(Tuesday) New York Times. The nominal reason she wouldn't
speak to the press for so long was, as I suspected, that her
lawyer told her not to. The interview didn't have much in
it; essentially, she denied wrongdoing.

What still needs to be explained is why no other lab attempted to
replicate the findings after the controversial paper was 
published in 1986. I've followed this story only casually,
and I don't recall reading about the issue of replication.
If people had attempted to replicate her results, the whole
business might have been over in a couple of years.

Compare this to the "cold fusion" flap. The whole thing was =about=
replication.