Support for the fight against pseudoscience. The Commission for Combating Pseudoscience in Wounds is being liquidated due to a conflict with the Russian Orthodox Church Alemanov Sergey Borisovich pseudoscience

Support for the fight against pseudoscience- one of the priorities of the fund. "Evolution" supports the creation of memorandums of the Commission for Combating Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and together with the Organizing Committee of the "Scientists Against Myths" forum and the portal "Anthropogenesis.ru" has established the Russian Academy of Pseudosciences (VRAL).

The first result of the joint work of "Evolution" and the Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences for the fight against pseudoscience was Memorandum No. 1 "On the pseudoscientific status of commercial testing on the skin patterns of the fingers" published in May 2016. In it, we say our resolute “do not believe” to those who, for money, read the character, fate, predispositions and illnesses of a person by the patterns on his fingers. The memorandum was widely disseminated and caused a lot of publications in the media, including broadcasts on central TV. We are sure that now it will be more difficult for “dermatoglyphists” to deceive people, to infiltrate schools and universities.

In February 2017 it was published Memorandum No. 2 "On the pseudo-scientific nature of homeopathy". The document caused a great resonance in society and the media: more than 4,000 media publications, including in the Western Independent and Nature, an uncountable number of posts and comments on social networks, cartoons, memes and sticker packs in Telegram. We continue to keep our finger on the pulse and expect the promised steps from the Ministry of Health.

Reference: The Commission for Combating Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences was established in 1999 on the initiative of Academician Vitaly Ginzburg and is engaged in public criticism of pseudoscience and beliefs in the existence of paranormal phenomena. In particular, thanks to the activities of the commission, it was possible to prevent a large-scale scam by Viktor Petrik.

In 2016, the commission created a special publication format - memorandums, which should briefly, clearly, objectively and unemotionally record the current state of scientific consensus on topics that cause the most heated discussions in society. Now the preparation of memorandums is carried out by experts recommended by the commission with the support of the Evolution Foundation. The final texts of the memorandums, after being approved by the commission, are published on its website, as well as in the In Defense of Science bulletin.

On October 2, 2016, with the support of Evolution, the forum "Scientists vs. Myths 2" was held in Moscow, in which more than 600 delegates participated live, and about 400 more people watched the event online. On the eve of the forum, the Anthropogenesis.ru scientific and educational portal and the Evolution Foundation established the Honorary Academician VRAL anti-award. The three finalists were selected in a popular vote on social media. The first "Honorary Academician of VRAL" was an active fighter against GMOs (as a "product of extraterrestrial civilizations") Irina Ermakova, she received a wonderful prize - a sculpture of a sad reptilian. The jury of scientists and popularizers of science decided that her merits in the field of pseudoscience are even steeper than the contribution of the author of the "New Chronology" Anatoly Fomenko and the satirist-"linguofreak" Mikhail Zadornov.

Nominees:

• Irina Ermakova
• Anatoly Fomenko
• Mikhail Zadornov

Jury members:

• Mikhail Gelfand
• Irina Levontina
• Mikhail Lidin
• Natalia Demina
• Alexander Panchin
• Svetlana Burlak
• Svetlana Borinskaya
• Alexey Vodovozov
• Mikhail Rodin
• Alexey Bondarev
• Stanislav Drobyshevsky

Here is how the main Pseudo-Science Prize of 2016 was presented:

“Finally, to the sound of fanfare, the presenters announced the results of the vote: a confident victory for Irina Ermakova. The members of the jury justified their choice by the fact that the anti-GMO movement causes real damage to the development of Russian science and the country's economy. A charming assistant brought the main prize to the stage - a sculpture of a sad reptilian by Nikita Makletsov - but alas, the winner did not appear at the ceremony, and the prize went to Mikhail Gelfand (Mikhail promised to transfer the award to Irina Ermakova at the first opportunity). Cow members VRAL and Fomenko with Zadornov did not appear for diplomas, although, according to the organizers, official invitations were sent to all finalists. Full text at the link.

Reference: VRAL is a prestigious organization, one cannot become a member for any money. This high honor is awarded only to persons who have made an outstanding contribution to Russian pseudoscience. Trofim Denisovich Lysenko (posthumously), Juna (posthumously) and Amvrosy Ambruazovich Vybegallo (virtually) have already become full members of the VRAL. Applicants and finalists are selected by open voting, and the winner is determined by the jury. All finalists are awarded the position of Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Pseudosciences.

The program was funded by donations from a private donor.

You can specifically support the program of the Evolution Foundation to combat pseudoscience,

Commission activity

"... the pseudoscience of cybernetics serves as a tool in the hands of the instigators of a new world war."(Soviet philosophical dictionary of the years)

Commission E.P. Kruglyakova consolidated a group of near-scientific routines who disagree with the scientific and technological revolution and are somehow offended by colleagues who are more useful and popular in scientific terms, who are their main target. The commission makes recommendations to the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences on controversial scientific issues and is engaged in public criticism of "pseudoscience" and paranormal beliefs - astrology, alternative medicine and religion. Moreover, this criticism is made on methodologically weak grounds that do not take into account the achievements of the philosophy of science in recent centuries. Thus, in the publications of the Commission, no distinction is made between such concepts as pseudoscience, quasi-science, parascience, deviant science- all manifestations of near-scientific activity are indiscriminately marked with a bogey "pseudoscience".

Of all the signs of scientific knowledge in the manifestos of the Commission, only empirical verification, the weakness of which was established in the first half of the 19th century. According to this criterion, any social and humanitarian knowledge obviously falls out of the scientific field - it is somewhat paradoxical that it is accepted by those scientists in the humanities who make up the majority of the activists of the Commission E.P. Kruglyakova. This indicates that the true goals of the Commission differ from its manifestos.

“Pseudoscience is that which contradicts firmly established facts. What is a hypothesis? A hypothesis is, in essence, an assumption. What is a theory? A theory is a hypothesis that finds experimental confirmation, moreover, experiments must be reproduced by other researchers. (E.P. Kruglyakov, "The Eternal Mover of Pseudoscience" // In Defense of Science, Bulletin No. 10, , p. 13) “At first glance, it seems quite clear what pseudoscience is. But in fact, this needs to be clarified, because even quite literate people, not to mention all sorts of demagogues and swindlers, are very afraid of the term “pseudoscience” and the fight against it, because they think like this: how does science develop? This is a struggle of ideas, different hypotheses, and so on. And some person can call what he does not like pseudoscience. That is, it will not be a real help to science, but just a way to pinch someone. So I just want to start with this. The definition can be given as follows: pseudoscience is all sorts of constructions, scientific hypotheses, and so on, which contradict firmly established scientific facts. I can illustrate this with an example. Take, for example, the nature of heat. We now know that heat is a measure of the random motion of molecules. But this was not known before. And there were other theories, including the theory of caloric, which consists in the fact that there is some kind of liquid that overflows and transfers heat. And then it was not pseudoscience, that's what I want to emphasize. But if now a person comes to you with the theory of caloric, then this is an ignoramus or a swindler. Pseudoscience is what is known to be false. ... Then the question is, does exact knowledge exist? There are, of course, more subtle questions. I am not at all a supporter of dogmatism. Therefore, I am very careful. I have never called pseudoscience what is simply doubtful. And when I say - pseudoscience, it means that I, and you can check it on the example of others, I am firmly convinced that this is nonsense. But you can not endlessly prove the same thing. ..." (V.L. Gisburg, “There are a large number of ignoramuses and swindlers”, 07.04.)

The main "pseudo-scientific" target was the search for alternative energy sources and unknown fields (for example, torsion fields, cold nuclear fusion, non-Einsteinian theories of gravity, anti-gravity, "wave genome" or bioenergy informatics). A small stream of criticism is directed at the New Chronology, however, the commission does not provide any scientific counterargument, referring mainly to the authority of the opinion of its members on the condemned issues and counting the "profits" of its opponents. According to the publications of members of the Commission, it can be understood that the issue of funding scientific research is more important for them than finding out the prospects and usefulness of themselves. The Commission actively cooperates with the Russian Humanist Society, a public organization of an anti-scientist, atheistic-liberal direction, which does not prevent its members from participating in religious events of the most obscure kind.

Ak. V.L. Ginzburg celebrates the ritual in the Moscow synagogue

“And by teaching religion in schools, these, to put it mildly, church bastards want to lure the souls of children.” (Ginzburg V.L.“The influence of the church on the school” // News of Education, No. 3 (75), February 1–15)

The product of many years of activity of the commission Kruglyakova became a multi-page instruction Evgeny Davidovich Eidelman(“Pseudo-scientists under the microscope of science. Questionnaire and recommendations for its use”// Bulletin “In Defense of Science”, No. 1, pp. 68–85, and an earlier version), which makes it possible to classify a particular study as “pseudo-science” , without understanding the essence of the tasks to be solved.This bureaucratic essay is composed in the spirit of the most extreme conventionalism, and as if descended from the pages of works M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. According to the proposed criteria, “pseudo-scientific research” automatically includes all new theories or works by authors who have not had previous publications in the chosen field. Scientific works are recognized only as those that develop and refine generally accepted indisputable theories, and do this by long-tested methods. This document has become a kind of manifesto of conformists and imitators in Russian science, and is very popular in this environment (it is interesting to note that this near-scientific work was carried out with the support of the RFBR grant No. Russian scientific community).

“There is world science, and everything that does not fit into its criteria is pseudoscience.” E.P. Kruglyakov, Sciencerf, 03/15/2007 “Scientists are humble people, they deal with specific problems, but they sometimes make great discoveries as a by-product. Pseudo-scientists initially claim to "turn" science and subvert its foundations - no more, no less.(member of the CBL&FNIPRAN E.D. Eidelman Common sense, 2004, No. 4)

Activity Commission Kruglyakov has a directive, anti-scientific character, since in its conclusions it relies on one-sided, unfounded and declarative judgments of its members or anonymous experts, neglecting the generally recognized rules of scientific argumentation and discussion. In the media, this organization is often incorrectly referred to as "Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences on Pseudoscience". Thus, a group of self-proclaimed pseudo-scientific activists is trying to give themselves a scientific and academic status, but at the same time maintaining complete freedom from any control of their essentially sectarian activities by the Academy of Sciences and demonstrating the mimicry technique inherent in quasi-science in modern times.

“Many fighters against pseudoscience are extremely weak in terms of metascience. But at the same time, for some reason, they do not consider themselves to be pseudoscience.”(D.Ph.S. V.A. Kanke“Letter from Yu.I. Efremov")

Since the year the Commission has been publishing the "Bulletin for the Defense of Science", the editor-in-chief of the publication - E.P. Kruglyakov, his deputy Yu.N. Efremov, executive Secretary - V.G. Surdin, members of the editorial board: E.B. Alexandrov, P.M. Borodin, S.P. Kapitsa, V.A. Kuvakin, A.G. Litvak, R.F. Polischuk, L.I. Ponomarev, M.V. Sadovsky, A.M. Cherepashchuk

Composition of the commission

Despite repeated statements about the openness of the commission's activities, even its full composition is kept secret (this secret was first revealed on June 1 of the year) - only Babak Elena Vladimirovna(academic secretary) and Kruglyakov Eduard Pavlovich(chairman).

In the open press, the names of only the following activists were previously found:

• Chairman: E.P. Kruglyakov(+ November 6)
• Members: V.A. Rubakov(vice-chairman), E.V. Babak(Scientific Secretary), E.B. Alexandrov, V.B. Braginsky, A.I. Vorobyov, V.L. Ginzburg(+ November 8), V.N. Kudryavtsev, IN AND. Medvedev, G.A. Month, HELL. Nekipelov, ON THE. Plate, V.E. Forts, E.P. Chelyshev, ON THE. Awl; P.M. Borodin, Yu.N. Efremov, S.P. Kapitsa(+ August 14), V.A. Kuvakin, A.G. Litvak, R.F. Polischuk, L.I. Ponomarev, M.V. Sadovsky and A.M. Cherepashchuk.

Some members of the commission are not academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences or its corresponding members, and were recruited to the commission from outside. These are Yu.N. Efremov, S.P. Kapitsa, V.A. Kuvakin, L.I. Ponomarev etc.

Commission coordinates

119991, Leninsky prospect, 14

telephone, fax: (495) 938–17–19

email: [email protected]

Foreign Prototype Commission

Commission member Efremov Yu.N. indicates that the commission headed by academician Kruglyakov E.P., had foreign prototypes:

“Foreign analogues of the Kruglyakov Commission are often at the same time societies of secular humanists. Similar tasks for the Russian Humanistic Society, headed by prof. V.A. Kuvakin. It is this society that publishes the Common Sense magazine and books in which a lot of space is devoted to the fight against parascience. ... there are about 40 local organizations of this kind in the USA. Louisiana, for example, has the Baton Rouge Proponents of Rational Inquiry and Scientific Methods, and Kentucky has the Kentucki Association of Science Educators and Skeptics.” ()

Efremov Yu.N. in the same place, in alphabetical order, lists the following similar foreign communities:

• Belgian Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Phenomena Reputed to be Paranormal;
• Bulgarian skeptics;
• Initiative for the Development of Critical Thinking (Costa Rica);
• Indian Association of Rationalists;
• Kazakhstan commission for the study of anomalous phenomena;
• Korean preoccupation with pseudoscience;
• Society for Research on the Credibility of Reports of Anomalous (Malta);
• Society for the Development of Critical Thinking (Spain);
• Japanese network of anti-pseudo-science activities.

Academician A.T. Fomenko on the activities of the commission

“... it is very easy for the current commission to combat pseudoscience to slide down to the level of the Holy Inquisition. Of course, there are a lot of charlatans in the country, but there are also a lot of sound ideas that run counter to the official position of a number of people from the Russian Academy of Sciences.”("Creative pseudoscience", RBC daily, April 11)

Comments on some declarations of KpBsLpPRAN

• “I see danger in any illiteracy and delirium. ... now we know for sure that astrology is nonsense. As we know? Two arguments. First - we know from the time of Galileo, Kepler, Newton the forces with which the planets act on the earth. These forces are insignificant. Not to mention the stars, which are far away and do not act at all. So the influence of the gravitational field of celestial bodies on people is absolutely negligible. The second argument, understandable to everyone, is simply real statistical research. They took several thousand babies born at the same time with an accuracy of a few seconds. Followed their fate - no connection. ... I understand issues of pseudoscience, in matters of religion, I do not hide my opinion and always answer questions about this and write articles.” (V.L. Ginzburg, “There are a large number of ignoramuses and swindlers”, 07.04.)

Without intending to substantiate the correctness of astrological methods, it should be noted that the criticism of the academician Ginzburg contains deliberately erroneous statements that compromise the case for which he undertook. After all, he, in fact, in one fell swoop declares that The Moon and the Sun have almost no effect on the Earth., what there is no cosmic radiation, and the stars of our galaxy have no effect on the solar system, what Thousands of people are born on Earth every second. The first two statements are unforgivable for a modern physicist, the third contains obvious anti-scientific nonsense, since according to statistics, about 3 person. Therefore, the claim that someone unmentioned Ginzburg“We took several thousand babies born at the same time with an accuracy of a few seconds. Followed their fate...” is a forgery. It is hardly possible to refute astrology or anything else on such poor methodological grounds.

Academician E.P. Kruglyakov on the establishment of a commission

“The first chairman was Kruglyakov. How it happened. The history of the creation of this commission is as follows. When the new Russia began, I don't know if you remember, there was a monstrous orgy of all sorts of outrages in the press. And I well remember Mr. Valentinov, who allowed publication in the state-owned Rossiyskaya Gazeta as a description of the case when the deceased rose from the coffin, came to life and began to grow younger. I started by collecting all sorts of such nonsense. And I wanted to write something about this, but there was no time, there were no publications in the newspapers either. Until the 94th year. In 1994, I had two operations, and here I found the time and place, I asked my wife, she brought me the whole folder, and I wrote a very large article called “What is happening to us”, it is on the Internet like there is. And while I was in the hospital, I published it through journalists I knew. In my opinion, it was published by Science of Siberia and two small Moscow newspapers, Utro Rossii and the former either Leninets or Leninskoye Znamya. This article was published in three newspapers. And quite unexpectedly for me, she began to live her own life, I counted 20 publications of this article. Here I felt that I could write. And then they showed up in the Rossiyskaya newspaper two posts of absolutely vile content - praised the leaders of the torsion fields . This is Akimov and Shipov. The articles were absolutely absurd, and I wrote an article where I figured out why this, this and this cannot be. And besides, he demonstrated the complete ignorance of the journalists who published it. One of the journalists was Mr. Valentinov, head of the science department at Rossiyskaya Gazeta, and I don't remember the second author. I sent an article to Rossiyskaya Gazeta. It was the 97th year. The article lay for six months and was never published. And then I somehow ended up in the Ministry of Science and went to one of the ministers of science named Kozlov. And I say: the Ministry of Science is still a government body, is it really impossible to put things in order: they publish any nonsense, but it is impossible to publish a refutation. Then he showed me the turntable - recruit the editor-in-chief. I recruited the office of the editor-in-chief of Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Mr. Yurkov. And I began to explain to him: so and so I wrote an article - a commentary on two articles published in your newspaper. He said that he remembers such an article that he forwarded to Valentinova, he must decide what to do. He gave me Valentinov's phone number, I contacted him, and Valentinov told me: why are you touching journalists, well, if you wrote an article about these scammers - and we, of course, would publish it. And you scold journalists. I told him: and if journalists write complete nonsense, do you think that it is not necessary to react to this? In general, further he offered me after my return from a business trip so that we can meet and discuss the situation. Returning from a business trip, I turn to Valentinov. He says: you know, we are undergoing renovations, I couldn’t find your article, I started to come up with pretexts. Then he got sick. Etc. It dragged on for a long time. And here I came to this very deputy minister, complained again, he connected with the government in my presence. There was a person responsible for the press, I don't remember now who. He outlined the essence of the matter to him, I gave him my manuscript, and nine days later this article was published without a single blot or correction. It occupied two-thirds of the strip, a large one. And one third was occupied by the rebuff of Mr. Valentinov, who wrote that I was surprised by the behavior of Academician Kruglyakov. As in the most stagnant, musty times, instead of writing directly to the newspaper, he turns to the government, forcing him to publish an article. It's just amazing demagoguery. In my article at the very beginning it is written that I wrote to the editorial office, it was held up for a long time, and now, when I really turned to the government, this is surprising to Mr. Valentinov. This article and Valentinov's answer caused outrage in the Academy of Sciences, Ginzburg went to Osipov and offered to create a commission to combat pseudoscience . Then the matter developed as follows: it was in the summer, Osipov called me in Novosibirsk and offered to join the commission. I agreed. And some time later, a resolution was issued in which the composition of the commission of 12 people was formulated, and I was appointed chairman. It didn't agree with me. Since then, I have been chairman of the commission. The other day in Rossiyskaya Gazeta there was an article by Kapitsa, in a sense, in defense of the commission. And it was said there that Ginzburg was the chairman of the commission, and after his death I became the chairman. This is not true. We had very good, warm relations with him, often called up, discussed all sorts of proposals and ideas, and worked hand in hand until his death.”

With gratitude to the "Russian People's Line" - Editor-in-Chief Anatoly Dmitrievich Stepanov and Deputy Editor-in-Chief Alexander Valentinovich Timofeev, who agreed to give this material, because this is an appeal for help to the President of the country, the Prosecutor's Office, lawyers, as well as scientists of the country, who know my work and me personally. Drop your grudges and let's help each other - otherwise they will eat one by one! Do not be afraid, there is the President of the Russian Federation, the prosecutor's office is still working. Let's hope someone can help.

First, I will state the circumstances and give my assessments, then I will formulate an appeal to the President of Russia.

On September 23, 2019, an unsigned report by the Commission on Combating Pseudoscience of the Russian Academy of Sciences was placed on the website of the Russian Academy of Sciences, which allegedly exposes unscrupulous candidates for the Russian Academy of Sciences. It was filed categorically, rudely, with obvious pressure to expel from their ranks, influence elections, with recommendations not to vote, but boils down to pumping information from an Internet fraudulent group that seized the right to dispose of dissertations and their comparison in the country, gaining access, introducing standards posting still unprotected works on the Internet (which directly undermines the information security of the country, but gives a field of work for this group of fraudsters). Why scammers? Yes, because they know perfectly well that the opponent and even the supervisor could not determine plagiarism - technically. However, even eminent academicians are hung up to discredit. Moreover, in a boorish manner, it is indicated that the legal plane of the issue is of no interest to anyone, it is necessary to argue on the scientific side. And to argue, excuse me, in connection with what? What is presented in the scientific part? What scientific ethics are the opponents or leaders violating? Do they buy other people's dissertations or sell them for 250-550 rubles on the Internet, by the way, the authors do not have a penny from this, their intellectual work and intellectual property are so important (which lives its own life after being transferred to the state repository, falling for analysis to a private trader), which these third fraudulent groups defend and fight for, existing on whose money it is not clear? Apparently, the West pays well for discrediting and subjugating Russian science. As always, the councils invited opponents to the defense, sent a letter stating that the opponent should evaluate the novelty, practical significance, and degree of reliability of the results, but not compare the texts, revealing plagiarism. This is not his task, especially since there was no comparison technology then, and the RSL did the examination (later, apparently, for the sake of Internet fraudulent groups, it was deprived, by the way, of such a right). So, it was on the basis of the information of this Internet fraudulent group that the Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences built its “report”.

Under the presumption of guilt, the Report contains three accusatory positions against me:

1. Serial production of bad dissertations;

2. Work in a certain center, which seems to be illegally using something and self-proclaimed;

3. As an opponent, he opposed the works (13, but opposed much more and since 2014 also opposed), where they allegedly (who checked?) Some matches were found, as well as in two works of my applicants (by the way, out of 20).

Regarding opposition and leadership, it was noted above that when there is no technology for comparing texts and this is not a function of the opponent, how can one blame him for something? I'm not saying that the very form of searching for witches with reference to the scientific activities of the opponent himself is blatant savagery and abomination. Contribution to the science of the opponent, and if another work, I emphasize, something was found!

The head could still be blamed if several students cheated from each other, but he did not notice. These scammers are trying to make just such accusations to Academician Bokeria. However, my two applicants did not know each other and did not see each other's works, they did the research on their own, apparently they made a mistake, either when making footnotes, or joint work with someone when laying out the dissertation, they included it in its general text (and the volume of this not great). But the supervisor cannot physiologically establish this, or they made technical errors in the layout of the text when reworking the work; this often happens, especially in reviews that are imposed on dissertators at different stages of their research by the very system for preparing such works. By the way, their work was quite good for its time, for one I came up with the use of a three-vector diagram, taking into account institutional factors, for the second, a calculation criterion for the development of regional mortgages. These are protections of 10-12 years ago. I suggested it personally, I remember it from memory, maybe there was something else - you can’t remember everything, so this contribution can by no means be plagiarism. The novelty in the works was, they received, this is not plagiarism. Therefore, it is the pseudo-legal reasoning of the Commission that is ridiculous. If texts are being defended, then why questions, reports, pre-defenses, all the hassle. You would better collect statistics on how many people get sick after doctoral studies and die from nerves, but you would pay people in the 2000s so that they do not rot half-starved. Do you think they don't do custom work now? The price has risen and everyone is run through anti-plagiarism, the texts are verified - that's it, novelty is not needed, anyhow. But no one needs novelty with a formal approach to plagiarism. Errors in the design of footnotes, even no one takes into account. This is without a doubt a plagiarized psychosis in the country. Now graduate students and doctoral students are adjusting everything to anti-plagiarism, but there is no novelty or it is small, but everything passes! Here's what we got in the end. Even students are forced to have this psychosis for essentially educational work, and they are engaged in paraphrasing, but there was no knowledge, and there is no aspiration with this approach. The commission essentially put the principles of the Academy under a formal approach, fighting, allegedly for high ideals, under the game imposed by swindlers. Of course, no one is in favor if, say, 70% of the work is written off, novelty and so on is not acceptable, but when layout errors of 5 pages of text are given out as the most heinous crime, this is wild and ridiculous. You look at the novelty, maybe there is a revolution in science, but you didn’t notice it - fighters for the purity of the ranks! The struggle itself cannot be carried out by low methods, meanness, distortion, outside the legal field by third parties, as well as conclusions based on nothing - simply false in my case. In this case, it was the Commission itself that crossed the line of scientific ethics, using dirty electoral technologies in the elections of the Russian Academy of Sciences - for the first time in its history. In 2016, during the elections, Internet scammers themselves made such mailings, as one of the academicians told me, now this lie is posted on the RAS website. Congratulations RAN.

The audacity of this Commission is simply amazing. She needs some proof. No, you can present evidence of the serial production of certain works by me, just sign under the evidence so that it is clear who to call for criminal liability for libel, with whom we will deal further precisely in the legal field. Because there was no production in principle, and could not be. I did not do such things - everyone knows this, even from my critical reviews in dissertation councils. Post all my reviews - for all the dissertations opposed. Many have been hanging since 2014 - so what about you? Bring them! Bring my work from my personal site or give a link to it everywhere. No, it's easier to blame and insult!

The meanness of this Commission is not even in the fact that it believed Internet scammers, and that it seems that it does not want to notice that people did not have the possibility of such a check (and did not even have to do it according to the established practice of defense of that time), but that this is done before the elections, when no one wants to understand anything, no contribution to science is needed, punctures are needed, largely contrived, in order to push through their thieves candidates who have not done a damn thing IN SCIENCE, a week without a year, premature, defended already during the checks, did not really oppose, and if they oppose, then after 2014. Since 2014, when the text control technology appeared, I also oppose and everything is in order, but I also do not check for plagiarism myself, this is done by the department and the council, not the opponent! That is, the presence of technology - everything determines, at least, a lot, and to lynch an opponent and even a leader, knowing in advance that he is not to blame for this, not taking into account his work in the elections to the Russian Academy of Sciences, his contribution, clearly smuggling thieves - this is it an official crime committed by individual members of the RAS. Indeed, there is a situation where "he who does not work eats the one who works." If I didn't oppose, I wouldn't get anywhere!

A person could work in the center and not be aware of which logo the organization uses and whether it is legal, part of the time could there be legal use? Not to mention why the Russian Academy of Sciences for a long time allowed the use of the brand illegally, which it is now dampening with the work of such Commissions? I did not work at the specified center, but even if I did, they want to expose me as if I were to blame for something, just because the center posted information about me taken from the Internet, building some kind of their own plans, which are clearly not come true. The employee to the label and the name, whether it is used legally or not, may have nothing to do in principle!

What commission will deal with this? Yes, no, they show that they do not need to figure it out, everything is decided, they need to scold, pumping some information from the scammers. In 2019, even reports seem to have been cancelled. If in 2016 they reproached me, why didn’t you report. And A.I. Tatarkin died and I could not recover for half a year, if not more - I adored him! What are the reports? But it turns out that in 2019 it is no longer necessary to perform, why were they reproached in 2016? A? They don't want to listen, it's hard, apparently! It's easier to publish libels (false information) on the RAS website!

I’ll tell you how they started dragging the thieves in advance (I can name Sergeev A.M. personally!) Imagine a person defends, say, a doctoral thesis on June 3, of course, she is already undergoing anti-plagiarism, but the point is that - there’s nothing in it itself , out of 15 members of the council, 10 people vote for it, that is, it passes with one vote. However, a person is nominated as a candidate for election, and the deadline for submitting documents is, say, June 9 (the coincidence of dates is random). That is, he is served by a de facto candidate of science! So in a hurry, they are afraid not to be in time! Voting is already in October, and by this time, apparently, a doctoral diploma is brought up and handed over, which could not be at the time of submission of documents. Already then there are requests to give him a voice - a tick, why? To light up the next elections in the Russian Academy of Sciences. A year later, about the same professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences is given - one place in total. The rest are in flight. And why was a professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences introduced, that is, it was hard to get a professor of the Higher Attestation Commission - it became difficult, they tightened it, and why then they tightened it to introduce “professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences” for thieves, and why there are three titles in the country - professor in the department, professor in the specialty (this is the Higher Attestation Commission) and professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences?! Why all this mess? With limited places, with tougher VAK ranks? Is one professor "more professorial" than another? So, our character receives both a doctoral degree and a professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences in two years - what achievements have expanded? Well no! Proximity to blat is great! And in 2019, on May 6, an announcement appears about the elections, and already on May 12 - they chose - his name sounds on the sidelines! What is it like?

I will say one thing, without a detailed consideration of the contribution, but with a focus only on libels - all this cannot be called a choice! The reform of the RAS, as I suggested in 2006, 2009 and 2013, should be carried out by changing the atmosphere within the RAS and the election procedures - the essence of this system. However, reading, understanding, opposing (for free, without bribes) is work, but dealing with libels, downloading from the Internet from scammers is the norm of behavior for a modern scientist! The zero order should be applied to such a Commission - to reset it, and to apply the comparison technology - that's how long the technology was created - look, and those people who have been in science for a long time and whom you identify some paragraphs, then give them the opportunity to re-defend. See contribution! But it is necessary to work, it is easier to pick up libels. And if it's a fit and there are no matches, and the contribution is large, what then? The honesty of scammers from the Internet who are not pure is higher than the honesty of scientists and university staff?! Good benchmark!

And this character has about 24 of his 109 works in the "elibrary" (as of July of this year, documents have already been submitted for elections), the rest is co-authorship - and often 3-4 people each. So, perhaps, all of them should be elected, so that it would not be offensive, eh, Commission? This is a disgrace, and the Commission framed the Academy, got too carried away in the fight against lies, succumbed to it and began, apparently, to serve, maybe without wanting to

Thus, the Russian Academy of Sciences, represented by the Commission on Pseudoscience, to my deep regret, has sunk to the level of street squabbles in the gateway, falling under the heel of fraudulent persons on the Internet, apparently believing that unproven formalism is exactly the tool for inflicting competitive defeat on rivals. The Commission itself does not give a single scientific or even legal argument, violating the entire conceivable order of things and established practice, which the representatives of the Commission cannot be unaware of.

Yes, it turns out that the Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences made a scandal, apparently, this was what they were trying to achieve. This will also affect the vote, but I honestly stated the circumstances of the case! For vile accusations cannot be left unanswered.

Appeal to the President of the Russian Federation

Copies: President of the Russian Academy of Sciences Sergeev A.M.

General Prosecutor of Russia

Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

Dear Mr. President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Vladimirovich!

I appeal to you with a huge request to protect my constitutional rights in the elections to the Russian Academy of Sciences, in which I am nominated by two universities, an academician, and two corresponding members. To protect the honor and dignity of those teams that are nominating me for the second time in the Russian Academy of Sciences.

He graduated from school with a silver medal, a technical university with a red diploma without fours (a research engineer, research education, unlike many of our economists), defended 2 dissertations and wrote more than 20 scientific books. The works are published in Italian, Ukrainian, English, Chinese - in different countries. I have a medal of the Russian Academy of Sciences for young scientists, the best economist of the Russian Academy of Sciences for 2008, the Kondratiev medal for his contribution to the development of social sciences.

I ask you to influence the Russian Academy of Sciences in order to exclude the use of false information about candidates for members of the Russian Academy of Sciences, posted on the website of the Russian Academy of Sciences and prepared by the Commission on Combating Pseudoscience (report), which disseminates false information. Under the conditions of the elections, a month before them, this can be regarded as a deliberate influence on the candidates and on the choice in the sections of the Russian Academy of Sciences, which makes the choice unjustified. The Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences pursues such an impact, which it openly declares, its work is designed for this!

On the website of the Russian Academy of Sciences, there is information discrediting my honor and dignity, of a slanderous nature, as if I were mass-producing dissertations, working in some self-proclaimed center and participating in unscrupulous defenses. All this is not true. I didn’t make anything, didn’t work at the center, and participated in the defense with a scientific discussion, which I often initiated on my own, preparing reviews without payment, giving them critically, and dissertation councils voted for the assignment, which was also carried out by expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission. Such accusations are illegal, they show the destructive side where the Russian Academy of Sciences has gone in its bravura and ostentatious desire to demonstrate an allegedly honest election regime (in 2019 even the reports of candidates in the elections have been canceled, they were in 2016) - but by absolutely dishonest methods. This report, in fact, contains a call not to vote for the people included in the document, and, moreover, the document contains a threat that the named people, I am talking only about myself, although the threat concerns everyone, there is no place in the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences and educational institutions (violation of the constitutional right to educational and scientific activities, as well as labor law). How to understand such a threat, if I have been working in science and education for 23 years, I have always loved and tried to do my job professionally - I have no other job. After such libels on the website of the Russian Academy of Sciences, of course, I don’t want to work in this organization, but I have no other place where I could freely engage in science. And I am elected because there is a hope to change something that will someday be evaluated for the overall contribution to science.

I ask you to help draw the attention of the Prosecutor General's Office, the court, regarding the issue of initiating an administrative and / or criminal case against the authors of the said document (Report of the Commission on Combating Pseudoscience dated September 23, 2019, on the website of the Russian Academy of Sciences) on the fact of slanderous information posted on the website of the Russian Academy of Sciences character, deliberately discrediting the reputation of a person - this is exactly how the document was filed.

I ask for help.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, if it continues like this, then the Russian Academy of Sciences will slide down “to a street organization”, collating texts, scolding people, and will not be able to evaluate either a person’s books or articles, which, by the way, are all available.

With respect and hope for help, Doctor of Economics, Prof., Chief Researcher IE RAS

Oleg Sukharev

In the scientific world, the main thing is the reliability and proof of facts. Without this, knowledge can hardly be called scientific, contributing to the progress of mankind. But, you see, it is difficult for a simple layman to determine whether the information about the achievement, discovery, development that he met in the literature, the media, is proven and reliable. Checks of such a plan are already the prerogative of specialists. In Russia, they are united in a commission to combat pseudoscience and falsification. We will tell you about it today.

What's this?

The Commission for Combating Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research is a coordinating scientific institution formed under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Russian Academy of Sciences). It has been running its history since 1998. Then the commission was created on the initiative of Academician V. Ginzburg.

The main areas of work of the commission to combat pseudoscience are as follows:

Scope of the Commission

The initial main activity of the commission to combat pseudoscience and falsification of research in this area was the examination of those developments and theories whose authors claimed state funding. Thus, the Russian Academy of Sciences excluded the possibility of waste by counterfeiters and fraudsters of funds from the Russian state treasury.

But the ultimate goal of the organization is to completely oust false discoveries and pseudo-theories from scientific life. Expert groups in the commission consider new facts from the world of science and give their opinion on their reliability. The founders of this council at the Russian Academy of Sciences believe that getting the approval of the commission is a matter of principle for every scientist. Criticism from experts is the recognition of the failure of the pseudoscientific school.

Beginning of work

The work of the RAS Commission on Pseudoscience began on March 16, 1999 at a meeting of the Presidium of the Academy. He (the presidium) approved its composition, staff, procedure. Eduard Pavlovich Kruglyakov was appointed chairman. At the time of its creation, there were only 12 members in the ranks of the commission. Already in 2008 their number was 42. These are corresponding members and academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences, doctors of sciences, specialists conducting non-academic research.

It must be said that the leadership of the Russian Academy of Sciences had repeatedly taken the initiative to create such a commission long before 1999. For example, the event of 1992, when the President of the Russian Federation B.N. Yeltsin allocated 150 million rubles from the state budget for the development of the theory of energy release from stone, which was later recognized by real scientists as unscientific, became the basis for his speech.

Composition of the commission

As we have already said, the initial composition of the pseudoscientific commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences was equal to 12 participants. The second composition was approved in 2005. It was expanded to 41 members.

In 2012, after the death of Eduard Nikolaevich Kruglyakov, the commission was headed by Academician Evgeny Alexandrov. He picked up a new composition, which was approved by the Russian Academy of Sciences in February of the following year. It included many personalities known to both the scientific world and the general public:

In July 2016, the composition of the commission to combat pseudoscience (public group) again underwent changes. This was due to the unification of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences and the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences. As a result, the group of experts has increased due to the biomedical specialists.

As far as the present day is concerned, the Commission for Combating Pseudoscience (faq scisne) has 59 experts. Six of them are part of its coordinating body - the bureau:

• Vlasov V.V., doctor of medical sciences.
• Zh. I. Alferov, Vice-President of the Russian Scientific Academy, Nobel Prize Laureate in Physics.
• Polishchuk R. F., Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences.
• Rubakov V. A., Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
• Sadovsky M. V., Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
• Alexandrov E. B., Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The present chairman of the commission.

Publications, public speaking

The activities of the organization are open - everyone who is interested and interested can get acquainted with it.

Since November 2006, the Bulletin of the Commission for Combating Pseudoscience has been published. You can find its electronic version in PDF format on the official website of the organization. The Bulletin includes arguments, scientific articles, speeches, research results of scientists who criticize pseudoscientific arguments and postulates and prove their impossibility. This is information about false discoveries in history, physics, chemistry, astronomy, biology, genetics, and so on.

The memorandum of the commission on combating pseudoscience, released in May 2016, is also popular. He denounced commercial testing for skin patterns on the palms. According to the results of the examination, such tests were recognized as pseudoscientific, without worthy grounds.

Often, publications by members of the commission to combat pseudoscience can also be found in the media, popular science publications, and so on.

Foreign prototypes

Why is it so important for falsifiers and swindlers to feel their involvement in science? This is precisely the sphere of knowledge that led us to civilization, which we see today, which gave mankind many benefits. The status of science in the modern world of innovation is very significant. It is at the heart of planning, education, production. But the most important thing for a fraudster is that financial grants are allocated for the development of many new scientific theories and technologies.

But the fight against pseudoscience is aimed not only at preserving the state budget. First of all, it protects the dignity of real scientific knowledge, allows not to undermine the credibility of real discoveries and developments.

It is wrong to assume that pseudoscience refers to the erroneous assumptions of scientists. It refers to those falsified developments that are deliberately presented as scientific, for reliable. By malicious intent or misunderstanding of its creator.

Unfortunately, the popularization of science both in Russia and around the world is not yet at the highest level. Gaps in education can be dangerous for any of us. People sometimes give their last money for pseudo-scientific panacea-pacifiers, harm their health with medical devices and "medicines", whose benefits have not been proven by anyone.

Is the fight against pseudoscience an inquisition?

Will not criticism of scientific discoveries that seem false to experts, the notorious "witch hunt"? For the Russian commission it is excluded. It does not interfere in the disputes of scientists, the processes taking place in the scientific world. The discoverer, whose work is not recognized by colleagues, has no reason to fear criticism from the commission. But only in the case when he does not bring the problem to the public, far from the specifics of his activities, which is easy to mislead.

The fight against pseudoscience is the fight against everything that is outside the boundaries of the scientific world, but tries to get into it by fraudulent means.

Many wonder if the authority of the commission will be used to settle personal scores? Everyone remembers the Soviet fate of cybernetics and genetics. Representatives of the commission argue that the repetition of the mistakes of history in the modern world is excluded. The council of experts in its criticism relies on the views of the entire scientific community, and not just on their own.

Problems in the work of the commission

The main problem is that experts cannot call a spade a spade. Neither the pseudo-discovery is pseudoscientific, nor its creator is a falsifier. Russian law allows a fraudster to go to court with a complaint for insulting honor and dignity, business reputation. And the judicial system comes to the defense of such a plaintiff, no matter how weighty the criticism of the members of the commission may be. Therefore, in order to avoid such incidents, they have to limit themselves to only general words.

How can each of us help the commission?

Any of us can contribute to the work of the commission to combat pseudoscience. It's very simple:

• Visit the official website of the association, join its community on Facebook.
• Regularly get acquainted with the published bulletins, distribute this information in social networks, among friends and acquaintances.
• Report to the commission about specific pseudoscientific facts, phenomena, publications that you have come across.

The Commission for Combating Pseudoscience is an organization that protects modern society from scammers, charlatans, falsifiers who are trying to enter the scientific world. Such institutions operate not only in Russia, but throughout the civilized world.