flacaltenn
Diamond Member
This story ain't EVER gonna hit the mainstream media. Because not too many care when a Govt science labs goes rogue and starts manipulating tests, papers, reports to present results in a POLITICALLY favorable light.
This lab was a USGS Geophysical lab in Colorado. Many USERS of the data complained as far back as 2008 that these publications and results were totally unreliable. Papers were retracted, research was rejected and ended and FINALLY the OIG recommended the total closure of this lab just recently.
The "products" of this lab were vitally linked to current high interest Enviro areas like coal combustion, uranium in the environment, toxins in the Everglades, etc.. So since science incorporates citations and past data -- this cancer of scientific integrity will reverberate thru the literature for decades..
https://www.doioig.gov/sites/doioig.gov/files/2016EAU010Public.pdf
The recent scientific integrity incident has had numerous real and potential
adverse impacts on customers, products, and the organizational integrity of
USGS, as these pertain to coal and water quality research and assessments. We
noted, among those impacts, that one research paper that was ready for publishing
had to be retracted; certain scientists stopped preparation of scientific papers; the
lab’s data manipulation issues negatively impacted the reputation of numerous
researchers; and the loss of scientific integrity potentially may damage the stature
of USGS, both nationally and internationally. The results of USGS’ internal
inquiry are consistent with our own findings.
Products Affected
In conducting research and assessment projects, scientists rely on the accuracy of
information provided by ERP’s laboratories. Since ERP data is used to support
both scientific decision-making and understanding, inaccurate data has significant
scientific consequences. The affected coal and water quality related work
products from this scientific integrity incident included the following:
• Twenty-four research and assessment projects that have national and
global interest were potentially affected by erroneous information. A list
of each project is contained in Appendix 2. These affected projects
represented about $108 million in funding from FY 2008 through 2014.
ERP officials stated that they were in the process of assessing the impacts
on each project for determining future actions. Among the projects—
o toxic trace metals analysis of water in the greater Everglades
ecosystem in Florida;
o assessment of uranium in the environment in and around Grand
Canyon National Park in Arizona for possible groundwater restoration;
o analysis of coal combustion byproducts relating to the nationwide
Geochemistry of Solid Fuels project; and
o analysis of metals released into waters associated with coalbed natural
gas production activities in Alaska.
• At least seven reports have been delayed and, to date, one report has been
retracted. The retracted report was on air quality studies relating to feed
coals in South African boilers as part of a United Nations Environmental
Program study.
ERP’s publications serve an important role in understanding domestic and
international energy resources, and can directly influence energy-related decisions
and strategies of its diverse stakeholders, who include universities, the public, and
Government agencies.
Several customers worked for other organizations,
including the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the State geological
survey offices of Pennsylvania and Wyoming, and Southern Illinois University.
We interviewed 16 customers, nearly all of whom expressed disappointment,
anger, and/or distrust of the lab. Many stated in very strong terms they would not
use the lab if it reopened. These individuals also cited—
• reduced confidence of collaborators in USGS-generated data, as well as
providing fuel for critics of USGS;
• Bureau embarrassment, especially since similar issues have occurred twice
in the same laboratory;
• upset in the Organic Section because of the perceived connection between
the Inorganic and Organic Sections;
• undermining of public trust, as well as that of other scientific
organizations;
• impact on morale of scientists, in spite of reassurances after the first
incident that such a situation would not occur again; and
• personal impact on post-doctoral researchers working for USGS.
A bit of Congressional Review on this OIG Report is in the following link. Start at 47:22
Oversight Hearing on the Administration’s Response to Findings of Unethical and Criminal Conduct at the Department of the Interior
Just confirms the feelings that are almost NO NUMBERS coming out of the Capitol that can truly be trusted. Whether it's ObamaCare numbers, employment numbers, or even the average annual temperature of the US in 1947.
And when the media does not pick this important stuff up ---- it hinders VOTER judgement of how broken the oversight and bureaucratic management really is..
This lab was a USGS Geophysical lab in Colorado. Many USERS of the data complained as far back as 2008 that these publications and results were totally unreliable. Papers were retracted, research was rejected and ended and FINALLY the OIG recommended the total closure of this lab just recently.
The "products" of this lab were vitally linked to current high interest Enviro areas like coal combustion, uranium in the environment, toxins in the Everglades, etc.. So since science incorporates citations and past data -- this cancer of scientific integrity will reverberate thru the literature for decades..
https://www.doioig.gov/sites/doioig.gov/files/2016EAU010Public.pdf
The recent scientific integrity incident has had numerous real and potential
adverse impacts on customers, products, and the organizational integrity of
USGS, as these pertain to coal and water quality research and assessments. We
noted, among those impacts, that one research paper that was ready for publishing
had to be retracted; certain scientists stopped preparation of scientific papers; the
lab’s data manipulation issues negatively impacted the reputation of numerous
researchers; and the loss of scientific integrity potentially may damage the stature
of USGS, both nationally and internationally. The results of USGS’ internal
inquiry are consistent with our own findings.
Products Affected
In conducting research and assessment projects, scientists rely on the accuracy of
information provided by ERP’s laboratories. Since ERP data is used to support
both scientific decision-making and understanding, inaccurate data has significant
scientific consequences. The affected coal and water quality related work
products from this scientific integrity incident included the following:
• Twenty-four research and assessment projects that have national and
global interest were potentially affected by erroneous information. A list
of each project is contained in Appendix 2. These affected projects
represented about $108 million in funding from FY 2008 through 2014.
ERP officials stated that they were in the process of assessing the impacts
on each project for determining future actions. Among the projects—
o toxic trace metals analysis of water in the greater Everglades
ecosystem in Florida;
o assessment of uranium in the environment in and around Grand
Canyon National Park in Arizona for possible groundwater restoration;
o analysis of coal combustion byproducts relating to the nationwide
Geochemistry of Solid Fuels project; and
o analysis of metals released into waters associated with coalbed natural
gas production activities in Alaska.
• At least seven reports have been delayed and, to date, one report has been
retracted. The retracted report was on air quality studies relating to feed
coals in South African boilers as part of a United Nations Environmental
Program study.
ERP’s publications serve an important role in understanding domestic and
international energy resources, and can directly influence energy-related decisions
and strategies of its diverse stakeholders, who include universities, the public, and
Government agencies.
Several customers worked for other organizations,
including the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the State geological
survey offices of Pennsylvania and Wyoming, and Southern Illinois University.
We interviewed 16 customers, nearly all of whom expressed disappointment,
anger, and/or distrust of the lab. Many stated in very strong terms they would not
use the lab if it reopened. These individuals also cited—
• reduced confidence of collaborators in USGS-generated data, as well as
providing fuel for critics of USGS;
• Bureau embarrassment, especially since similar issues have occurred twice
in the same laboratory;
• upset in the Organic Section because of the perceived connection between
the Inorganic and Organic Sections;
• undermining of public trust, as well as that of other scientific
organizations;
• impact on morale of scientists, in spite of reassurances after the first
incident that such a situation would not occur again; and
• personal impact on post-doctoral researchers working for USGS.
A bit of Congressional Review on this OIG Report is in the following link. Start at 47:22
Oversight Hearing on the Administration’s Response to Findings of Unethical and Criminal Conduct at the Department of the Interior
Just confirms the feelings that are almost NO NUMBERS coming out of the Capitol that can truly be trusted. Whether it's ObamaCare numbers, employment numbers, or even the average annual temperature of the US in 1947.
And when the media does not pick this important stuff up ---- it hinders VOTER judgement of how broken the oversight and bureaucratic management really is..
SHOCKED 
