Petition to The Minister of Science, Canada

I now started a Petition to The Minister of Science, The Honourable Kirsty Duncan, asking her to answer my complaint of fraud in Canadian science administration.

The Petition is here:

I am asking everybody to sign it!
The Evidence link is included in the Petition. This is a stunning document! Please, see it here:

Canada lying.

It’s the Canadian way of life – lying. Never a truth. Today, the foreign minister on TV says that we have free trade with U.S. Truth: we never had. A block of cigarettes sells in U.S. for $50. In Canada the same is three times more. Canada is constantly lying to its citizens and to everybody else.
Who benefits from this? Canadian socialism does. Govt. tax is used to “create” jobs, because the citizens are totally disabled by the regime. Canada prohibits the sale of a mass of raw materials to the citizens, the citizens are disabled. Now, you will see crowds of marihuana addicts, out of any useful occupation but supported by Govt. Citizens are a trash. The Govt. only needs typists to rape the keyboards, probably, this is an occupation of the majority.

Big, silent Canada. The crime goes on.

I have probably finished writing the story of University of Toronto fraud, for now at least, including the fraud of NSERC:

The documents and facts are there. In the end, here are allusions to the story of Prof. Valery Fabrikant in Concordia University, very similar to my story, except of course that I never wanted to kill anyone. His story became well known only because he did kill. My story remains well known to the officials and the many scientists, but never told in the press. I again now made several attempts to get it into the press, but no, they remain silent: Canada is nothing but a spectacle in a theater with 35 millions seats and one producer.

Actually, the Fabrikant affair was also never told truthfully. Some quotes that I give on that site above raise the questions never answered, not in the press and not in the Arthurs Report (, namely, that Fabrikant shootings were intentionally provoked by the administration. The shootings can hardly be explained otherwise. To me, this seems certain because what is being done to me for 30 years is a sadistic, blatant provocation, repeating every time I try to complain. I got used to it, but the criminal Canada follows what certainly has been a long standing policy: Just provoke him! Make him guilty!

Interestingly, in 1994, one professor from the U of T Scarborough campus wrote a letter in my defence and invited me to talk. He told me that when he called S. Desser, the Head of the Dept., Desser shouted at him that he must stop defending me because I am “a second Fabrikant”. Desser intentionally lied: I never even talked to anybody, never met any official in this university; I wrote polite letters. This was the gang policy: “raising spectre of violence”, as it is called, spreading wild lies and provoking the victim beyond human endurance.

Unexplained, at least for the public, remains the motivation of this criminal gang. Wouldn’t it be easier for the University of Toronto to kick Larsen out and restore the order? What was the motivation of the Concordia University officials, in particular of the Vice Dean Rose Sheinin, in doing two fraudulent investigations of Fabrikant complaints and declaring the crooks and plagiarists in his Department innocent?

Why all canadian press uniformly lied about Fabrikant affair? Why all Canadian press uniformly refused to say a single word about the fraud in the University of Toronto and in the NSERC?

There is one answer to all these questions: The Canadian adminstration of science has been highjacked by a gang of jewish criminals who obtain great financial gains from their monopoly. All is here: tax exempt donations in hundreds of millions dollars, the names of the billionaires engraved on the buildings, the ability to accommodate the families, to appoint their clan to the key positions in academia and elsewhere, spread their influence far and wide, etc., etc.

When I tried to get a lawyer, 51 law firms, including all those with hundreds of lawyers, declared conflict of interest, they all worked for the University of Toronto. Out of 25 law firms specialising in intellectual property, 24 were in conflict, one had no money. A lawyer told me: “If a lawyer takes your case, his children will not be able to find a job in Canada.”

This jewish gang in academia are not jewish scientists, yet, they occupy some eight or nine out of ten key positions in academia, they are lawyers. That of course doesn’t mean that everybody else is free to speak out. There is a fear in the academia, a well founded fear of being thrown out after a single word of protest. This is a ruthless gang.

What about the “independent” press? The press theatre for 35 millions seats is owned by the two, sometimes by three or may be four moguls, depending on the arrangements they make. The jewish influence covers 100% of the editors and the staff at any time.

Who these jewish criminals are? They are torpid provincial crooks, they mostly have nothing to do at all with any science. (One of these Merds, D. Dewees, whose investigation discussed on my site, started questioning me, asking what my “empirical” research was, thinking I never heard the word.) The NSERC was called a “Masonic Lodge” in one of the quotes I give on my web site.

It was a horrible injustice that science and universities became the property of the jewish gang.

On Feb. 5, I again edited
And I referred the readers to this page for the “social aspects” of this fraud. The “social aspects” is about how to stop this jewish gang, and concretely – how to find a mass media outlet to report the documents.

I will continue sending the documents to the press.

100 years under communist revolution

100 years ago, a gang of communists took over the government in Russia. In the new government of about 160 people (including Central Party Committee and Cheka), 5% were Russians, over 70% were jews, the rest were other minorities.

This happened in the middle of the First World War. Wilhelm II (who hated jews as well as Russians) first allowed the train with top communist leaders, who were in exile at the time, to pass through Germany to Russia. And he gave these jewish communists a huge amount of money, because he thought that they will destroy Russia and help him win the war. He was stupid: a year after, communists made revolution in Germany.

Communists won by deception. On the German money, they printed, in previously unheard of quantities, a newspaper for the Russian solders saying: “Stop fighting and hurry up home where now the property of landowners will be distributed to the people.” The front collapsed. Solders never got any land, but started the civil war in which 20 millions of Russians were killed.

Tzar, his wife, four daughters and son were shot in a basement room by two or three jewish communists, and the corpses were burned. George V, a cousin of the Tzar Nicholas II, who first promised to rescue the family, refused to do anything, it would be politically incorrect as British bankers hated Russia. The murder of the Tzar and his family was described in a book of R. Wilton, the London Times correspondent in Russia; he then was fired by the Times.

The members of the first communist government and Cheka (translated as Supreme Commission Against Contra-revolution and Antisemitism) continued until about early ’30s, when Stalin took power. This group, headed by Trotzki, ravaged Russia because their ideology required total destruction of all European civilization and Christianity. Communism, they said, cannot be built when “old” culture exists; they wanted the World Revolution. Stalin had to stop them. Trotzki and the survived members of his gang emigrated. They later begged Hitler to attack and destroy Russia.

Trotzkists survived in the West. In the end of the 20-th century they changed their name to Neoconservatives, Neocons. It was them who forced US to start war against Moslems. They hate not just the Western civilisation but the Moslem civilisation as well. They now are killing both.

Why there are no references to my papers?

There are only 20-something, while there should have been twenty thousands. (The first paper is scanned here.) Why so little? The answer is: science went bad, not just wrong, but really bad after Second World War. Then, many nuclear physicists went into biology. On one side, they gave a physical background to the scholastic biology, but on the other side they taught, and with great insistence, a completely wrong idea that everything in nature is a result of a stochastic processes. The idea, of course, was the old masonic maxim: Order Out Of Chaos, and it was designed to fight God and His creative role. It was fine with the physics of, say, molecules in gas, where the physical laws come as a result of the presence of huge numbers of particles. But it was essentially wrong with biology, where we see a microscopic organism containing a hundred of cells and several organs, identical in all individuals. Of course, it is dead wrong in humans also, where minute differences in body shape are inherited in generations. In biology we deal with deterministic, not stochastic, laws and processes.

Yet, the scientists went ahead with thousands, if not millions, of papers based on the idiotic masonic philosophy; anything contrary is politically incorrect. Moreover, and that, probably, was the main reason – equations look sophisticated and “scientific” in a biological paper. And then – another blow to biology – the computer capabilities. Biologists now rape the keyboard instead of looking in microscope. The third reason is that a biologist, a second class scientist, cannot check your paper with formulas. The next reason: the paper with equations and formulas don’t need to end in a definite biological conclusions, and moreover, even if such conclusions are given, nobody can check this. That is now called theoretical biology.

It became much worse when clinical research, drug testing, etc. made statistical “proof” necessary. I ain’t going into this area, but just the fact tells it all: most of the research in biomedicine is either not reproducible or just a fraud. Scientists have no idea how to get it right. The critical piece by the editor of Lancet said that may be adopting much higher standard of statistical confidence will make the research better. I don’t think so. I think taking four rats, as it used to be done, and see the result is the best way, simply because 15% probability of a usually barely seen success does not count. You don’t need a flu vaccine to shorten your flu symptoms by one day.

Now, back to my papers. I went a different way. I supposed that I should build a model of cell proliferation in a tissue that will work with 100% certainty using minimal necessary assumptions. I did not care how many cells do not obey my rules in a real tissue. It was a deterministic model. And it met with a smashing negative comment from one author who said that I took only a narrow case in a theory (where he was a specialist), that allowed many possible solutions, in fact – an indefinite number of them. Of course, I laughed. I found a principle, a law which resulted in a perfectly functioning tissue. I found the simple, in fact – the simplest rule, which makes cells to divide in a tissue in such way that dividing cells replace the dying cells without changing the shape of this tissue, i. e. preserving the steady state indefinitely. I didn’t care about statistical noise which can introduce deviations from that law. I did not believe that we should start with a noisy model describing all possible situations and then never come to the principle. Newton did not consider the cases when an apple remains to rot on the tree, the cases which undoubtedly would be considered in a modern theory.

My critic, for instance, described cell divisions with the lattices (Voronoy polygons) that can have three-, four- (or more) rayed vertices. I made my cells to have only three-rayed vertices, because I thought that a four-rayed vertice can be represented as two three-rayed vertices, etc. I accepted that all cell sides in a lattice are equal in length. That immediately allowed me to build 3-D models that visually, geometrically reflected their essential topological properties. I considered only pentagonal, hexagonal and heptagonal cells in the lattice, because only these cells could appear as the result of the simplest and uniform cell division.

Many years later, I, purely accidentally, found that my (they now say – minimalistic) representation was a wise one. I found a paper by a Spanish mathematician (M. Vosmediano) who worked with the topology of carbon nanotubes and in one of her presentations she showed the pictures of my models, saying those are “a living curiosity”. Indeed, the atoms of carbon in graphene form lattices with these simplest and uniform, as in my models, parameters. And the nanotubes not only look the same, but they grow by the same topological rules as did my cells. The differences, of course are that 1) carbon atoms are brought into the lattice from surrounding medium, while new cells arise by the division of the existing cells, and 2) carbon atoms are represented by vertices in the lattice, while cells are represented by the bodies of the polygons. The discovery of the topological principles of growth of the nanotubes was made 12 years after my paper was published. At least, I did not plagiarise them! And I am sure they did not. That nature has topological laws working on different levels of the organisation of matter, that was a surprise.

Below: Isolated intestinal crypt (nuclei stained), and the crypt model with its bottom.

Global warming RETRACTION

Mike Adams reports in Natural News Sept 19, 2017:

“A stunning new science paper authored by climate change alarmists and published in the science journal Nature Geoscience has just broken the back of the climate change hoax. The paper, authored by Myles R. Allen, Richard J. Millar and others, reveals that global warming climate models are flat wrong, having been deceptively biased toward “worst case” warming predictions that now turn out to be paranoid scaremongering.

The paper, entitled, “Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C,” concludes that the global warming long feared and hyped by everyone from Al Gore to CNN talking heads were based on faulty software models… etc. that don’t stand up to actual measured temperatures in the real world. ”

I am not sure that Adams quotes correctly that paper “concludes” about “Al Gore to CNN talking heads”.
The paper does not say it was all fraud. Who knows, may be they just don’t want to go to jail. The “warming”, however, is closed for the scientists and the doubters too. I wonder if D. Suzuki will refund the money he earned on warming, or at least retract the propaganda directed at children when he said: “We are in trouble”. We indeed are but for a different reason. The trouble is that we have hundreds, if not thousands, of papers written on political demand by many crooks.

2000 years ago, Christ said: “Forgive them Father, because they don’t know what they are doing”. But now they all know what they are doing.

…… but the company is – Goooogle!

After N. Finkelstein was fired, he said he cannot find another job because employers look his name in Google.

You, who were not born in Soviet Russia, may not understand this Soviet joke:
A meeting in a factory.
The chairman invites people to speak: “Comrad Rabinovich, what are your thoughts?”
Rabinovich: “I have a question. Where are butter, sugar…?
Chairman: “Good question. We will work on it.”
Next meeting. Chairman: “Comrad Abramovich, what are your thoughts?”
Abramovich: “I will not ask where are butter and sugar. I am asking where is Rabinovich?”

The Soviet times now came to America. And it’s not even the Stalin’s times, it’s the earlier times of jewish commissars. They, or their reincarnations, survived and are not a bit less serious about abolishing our civilization; they call it Change. Communists never tell you their goals in advance. If you care to read, read The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The Protocols may be a forgery, or they may be authentic. What is important is that in 1905 the goals of communists were already known.

They now have policies in place, but don’t make a mistake – the policies can turn bloody. It depends on the reaction. Currently, being unable to find job, and being fired on political charges means exactly that, can very well spell the end of your life and, certainly, the end of the purpose of your life.

Now, back to Google. I was wrong in my previous post, was too optimistic, I thought they try to minimize the damage. No. If I had looked at the smile on the face of Danielle Brown, I would be much less optimistic.

Two years ago, three jewish communists (I. Oransky, RetractionWatch; D. Blum, activist; M. Arthur, President and Provost, University College London) made up a completely bogus “case” of “sexism” against the Nobel Laureate, Sir Tim Hunt, biochemist, in University College London, and fired him. He showed no resistance. Interestingly, only the women in his laboratory organised a protest. I added many comments to the “case” discussions. I noted that the now spreading quasi-communist regime in the West demands that an employee surrender all his individuality, views, attitudes, brains and all, to the employer, a condition never demanded in the communist countries, with the exception of China.

The regime now will be show-trying the new victim, apparently, in court, but first – on Twitter, with anonymous indignation. Some minor variations of the Soviet and Hitler’s trials, but basically – the same scenario. The result is predictable: no thrashing Danielle Brown, that’s it, that’s impossible.

Today, so-called intellectuals do not see themselves as the successors of Galileo, Giordano Bruno and all the people who knew that telling the truth was the purpose of their lives. Today, science itself is falsified, destroyed and is stolen by the thieving jewish communists. What is left? The destroyers feed the lies of multiple genders and cosmic travel to the idiots. Who is left? Mutilated bodies and perverted brains, who, and I am not exaggerating here, feel “positive” about it.

Google, by the way, initially appeared as the search engine that did not censor the results, as the older AltaVista used to do. Watch the Google Change now! Well, I am sorry, you won’t be able to watch anything, it won’t let you. In the hands of talented Danielle, Google becomes the instrument of Diversity. Diversity is achieved when people of multiple genders, nations and colors, all have exactly the same brains. There is a good expression for this in Boswell’s memoirs of Doctor Johnson: “One had better be palsied at eighteen…”.

And the last thing I want to write here would be this question: Is there anything in this story that was only staged to establish a precedent of what seems to be an unbelievable case of unopposed communist tyranny in America, the country with long and proud history of freedom and free speech? I will not elaborate. I just have hard time believing my eyes.