Introduction

In the 1980’s universities became an abode for political activists who did not come for science and literature, but for spreading counterculture, marihuana and other items of “change”. In science, they were incapable and infantile. They started an avalanche of falsifications and plagiarism in research. By now, most of the research in biomedicine cannot be reproduced or is an outright fraud.

My main web site – http://www.universitytorontofraud.com tells how these cretins removed me from the university and plagiarised my discoveries; see the story and the 50 documents on Google Cached. This site is now continued with new documents at http://sciencemishandled.wordpress.com/

My theoretical work reveals the basic pattern of cell proliferation in the organism. Surprisingly, the structure of carbon nanotubes discovered in 1992 exactly corresponded to the topological model of the living tissue proposed by me in 1980. Some references:
1. “Count of Cell Generations”,
https://sciencemishandled.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/1969-paper.pdf (in Russ.)
2. “Topological Solution for Cell Proliferation in Intestinal Crypt”,
J. theor. Biol. 1980 (87), 189-200
3. “Structure and Growth in the Living Tissue and in Carbon Nanotubes”,
https://arxiv.org/abs/1106.5705

Michael Pyshnov

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Feminism, communist terror in Canada

A few months ago, Prime Minister Trudeau said he is a feminist. Nobody reads newspapers, but watching TV is becoming essential. TV let us know that hate of feminism is hate crime; not saying it is the law, but that is the usual method of introducing communist terror. Slogans into your brain, then – into the law.

What is feminism? It is a conspiracy theory (men hate and exploit women) manufactured by communist revolutionaries in 19th century to attract 1/2 of humanity into the crowd of the deprived and exploited. Semi-educated, mentally deranged, sexually deviant, abandoned, violent women were recruited in Russia by the revolutionaries. Feminism further degraded these women, to the animals; they became females. Millions of these women became an insane, wretched, syphilitic refuse of the revolution.

Feminist maxims are read as the code of behavior of hardened criminals: Never apologise, Never be questioned by a man, etc. In Toronto, feminists bombed Litton Industries. In Sweden they drink menstrual blood on feminist festivals, (there exists a recording). The females became simply “pussies”. In Moscow, they desecrated Christian Temple. In Italy they set museum on fire. Thousands of these crimes are being committed. Feminists are communist criminals, their goal is destruction of civilisation. Feminists are trained in insanity, savagery and irrationality. They go naked on the streets and protest sexual “objectivisation” of women.

The original teaching the feminists received from jewish communist criminals (trotzkiists), whose goal was the world communist revolution. However, a few decades ago, some of them decided that jews are too rich to be true communists, and they separated. Never mind, both groups are sadistic communist destroyers.

In Canada, feminists are pushed to the top of the country administration, using a completely fraudulent claim of the past discrimination which they suffered before they were born. They became communist attack dogs, conducting “gender wars” and destroying every decent individual, men and women alike. They penetrated universities creating completely fraudulent “social science” and “women studies”. Communist and feminist propaganda is making a heroic intellectual out of every pornographer, narcoman and pervert. It has been reported that 1 in 4 teenage girls now has sexually transmitted disease.

One of the crimes committed by the feminists is killing their children to “punish” and “revenge” their boyfriend or husband. Yet, in the new feminist Canada, this is not a crime anymore, it became “post-partum depression” that curiously may last for several years and is not connected to any revenge. Feminists decision makers routinely abolish the civilized law and subvert justice.

For many years, the standard of attitude for canadian women was: “I am not a feminist, but …”, followed by some moderate female grievance. The standard now is: obey to feminism, under the pain of being fired from the job or imprisoned. Finally you have to realise why people call these monsters “feminazis”. They are women-parasites stealing from the real doers and killing them.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Canada, 100% jewish media loves Muslims?

This 100% jewish mainstream now loves Muslims and believes (really?) the public has no memory. But what about the fascist jewish campaign that continued for years on all their outlets in support of that scoundrel who called Koran Devil’s Verses? I can’t forget the jews-journalists, sociologists, politicians and human rights jews, their eyes dancing from one end to the other end of the television screens in celebration of the repeated insults hurled at Islam. It was almost everyday, jewish eyes were dancing, with tears of joy, appealing to the public – see, see, the Muslims are devils, their religion is devil!!!

When was this? Exactly when the wave of Muslim immigrants were coming to Britain. Britain was greeting Muslim immigrants. British tv was greeting this scoundrel, Canada mainstream was translating his BBC interviews. I don’t remember any such jewish exultation on any other occasion.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

NSERC President Pinto, administrative banditism again

On December 30, I sent a letter to NSERC President Pinto, requesting that the incompetent and illegal UofT investigation (by lawyer D. Dewees) be declared null and void, and the NSERC decisions which relied on this investigation be declared null and void.

NSERC, however, is the only game in town. And Pinto found how to circumvent the law: he continued the administrative banditism. But unlike in the previous NSERC one-sentence replies, he speaks at length.

My letter stated that the UofT investigation was conducted illegally, without an investigating committee and by a sole, scientifically incompetent investigator. To this, Pinto answered the following:

“… while the university did not strike an investigating committee as defined in its draft policy (i.e. a policy that was not yet in force), the investigation did respect the spirit of the draft policy, in that the investigation had the benefit of input from a subject matter expert.”

Is Pinto an idiot? Does he not understand why the committee is needed? Does he not understand that the “subject matter expert” who was not available to me, is not a substitute for the committee? Does he not understand that the sole UofT investigator, Dewees, who could not read scientific papers, i.e. the evidence in the case, and could not communicate with me competently, was appointed to make this investigation a mockery? Why on earth this investigation could use “spirit” of the draft policy, but could not use the draft policy which said a) that the committee must be convened and b) that the investigators must be competent?

Even an idiot would understand that using the “spirit” of the policy was an obvious fraud because this “spirit” magically disposed with two central requirements of the policy, which are, of course, the requirements of the administrative law.

He twisted the law, twisted the facts and ended by saying that my letters to NSERC will no longer be answered by him or by his staff.

It is worth to remember the two investigations that were conducted by Concordia University in response to V. Fabrikant complaints. Later, these two investigations were condemned by the Prof. Arthurs Report as “misleading”, “superficial”, “not based on a proper inquiry”, “clearly and seriously deficient” and “inadequate”.

The letter of Pinto is a clear proof of the collusion between UofT and NSERC where they conspired to illegally deny my allegations of fraud and plagiarism.

My letter to Pinto, his answer and my comments are posted on
http://sciencemishandled.wordpress.com/
This is an important reading for scientists and criminologists.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The most Canadian of all stories

A couple of days ago, a nurse was charged with murdering 8 people in the last 7 years in a nursing home and in CAMH – University of Toronto Mental Hospital. The canadian element here is that this was known to some doctor but never reported. On the Tee-Vee, an official of some sort explained that Canada is such a progressive free country that doctors have an obligation not to disclose confidential information. That’s obviously a crap: confidentiality is related only to their patients. But there are other rules preventing reporting the crimes of the co-workers.

Why? What this is all about? I thought for a few moments and… aha, I know why! What would happen if people could report the crimes of their co-workers? They obviously know so much about each other’s crimes that every governmental office, every hospital, university, etc., will cease to exist withing a few months.

Canada is listed as #9 least corrupt country in the world. If reporting of crimes of the co-workers were allowed, Canada would move to the first place on the corruption index.

Exactly the same “confidentiality” rules exist in the science administration – in universities and in their “watchdog” – NSERC; actually, these rules are imposed by the NSERC and all the “associations” (read – trade unions). The criminals inside remain inside. So, what happened to this nurse, she obviously made some mistake; was she caught denying jewish holocaust or was she a sexist?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Just one question

On April 9, 2012, I sent to the NSERC Secretariat 20 allegations of fraud perpetrated in the UofT investigative report of my case. I also made some such allegations years before, and they were never answered, but the new rules of 2012 obliged the Secretariat, Susan Zimmerman, the Executive Director of the Secretariat, to investigate such allegations.

The Secretariat did not investigate my allegations, lying that my “concerns” were already “addressed” by NSERC in their two letters (see below). (The full details are at http://www.universitytorontofraud.com/NSERCfraud.html)

“Dear Mr. Pyshnov:
I am writing regarding the allegations brought by you against Dr. Larsen. This matter has been reviewed by NSERC’s Committee on Professional and Scientific Integrity.
The Committee agrees with the conclusions of the investigative report that there was no breach of scientific integrity by Dr. Larsen. The Committee considered that Dr. Larsen behaved in a reasonable manner given your refusal to have the 1987 article published.
NSERC now considers this matter closed.
Yours sincerely,
Catherine Armour
Research Integrity Officer”

“Dear Mr. Pyshnov:
This is my response to your request to me, sent by e-mail on February 17, 2003. I have read your letter carefully and reviewed the file. There is no basis for any new action on this matter by NSERC. I can assure you that NSERC officials have acted with the highest probity and integrity. NSERC has not ever, and would never, participate in any fraud and cover-up.
I am satisfied that this difficult case was treated fairly and in accordance with policies in effect at the time. Thus, I see no requirement for my intervention. As for information related to your complaint, I would remind you that the inquiry was conducted by the university, not by NSERC. Accordingly, you participated in the process, you were provided with a copy of the final report by the institution, and, subsequently, you were advised by NSERC that our Committee agreed with the university’s conclusion. More recently, you have been invited to make a request using the Access to Information Act, which is the required approach for individuals seeking access to government documents. This is a process determined by law in which I cannot intervene. NSERC is required to provide you with information to which you are entitled, after which you will have recourse to the Information Commissioner and to the courts.
Yours truly,
T. A. Brzustowski [President of NSERC]”

I don’t see in these two letters any answers to my 20 allegations of fraud in the UofT investigative report. In both letters, NSERC only agreed with this report.

NOW, YOU LYING CRIMINAL, SUSAN ZIMMERMAN, WHERE ARE, IN THESE LETTERS, THE ANSWERS TO MY “CONCERNS”, I. E. THE 20 ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD IN THE UOFT INVESTIGATION?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Toronto Public Library cooperates with criminals

Toronto Public Library now took a communist action against my sites. This site in the Library shows text but the links to http://www.universitytorontofraud.com and to the particular documents are corrupted. The site http://www.universitytorontofraud.com does not show at all, their computer pretends to be downloading it, indefinitely. In the Toronto Public Library all links from the other sites to the University of Toronto Fraud apparently are corrupted in all Internet.

There is no explanation, but this is evidently an act of cooperation with criminals. They know that I cannot do anything, have no money, and even if I had money I would never ever get a single official or the lawyer or the court on my side.

Worse, my Stat Counter shows that the pages were requested, but it does not show that the computer did not display these pages, so the method that is used is deceitful. This method can be used by the criminals in any other place throughout the globe, and I would never know who had seen my sites and who had not. I have some indications that this actually is the case, but of course I cannot travel.

What can change the situation is references to my case in the scientific media. But, so far, there is only 1 (one). This is in the paper by M. Kumar “A Review of the Types of Scientific Misconduct in Biomedical Research” in Journal of Academic Ethics (DOI: 10.1007/s10805-008-9068-6). The pdf file that I downloaded is crossed in red by “For internal use only!”. The paper says:

“In plagiarism of authorship a person claims himself or herself to be the author of a complete work belonging to others. This is probably the meanest form of plagiarism. It often occurs when mentors plagiarise the work done by their students or junior researchers and completely deny authorship to the vulnerable students even though the entire research may have been conceived and conducted by the students with hardly any participation by the mentor. The junior person often never gets any justice as exemplified by the case of Michael Pyshnov’s research
concerning cell division in the University of Toronto was ‘stolen’ by his mentor and her
coterie of co-authors. All Pyshnov got after his fight for justice was loss of career as a
brilliant researcher.”

I have already sustained 30 years of fraud, persecution, mental and physical torture and provocation. In 30 years I never even raised my voice once, I knew what will follow – arrest and the death in prison.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment