施一公及清华大学用伪造的诺奖获得者邮件搞自我吹捧

相似文件 换一批

是 否 +2 论坛币

k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群

赵安豆老师微信：zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

立即领取

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币！

+2 论坛币

看看光明日报和人民日报等媒体的报道和施一公接受采访所说的那个“可获诺贝尔奖”的科研。摘录如下：

　　从1977年至今，很多科学家都在对剪接体进行研究分析但始终没有重大进展。清华大学施一公团队的成果不仅将精度从5.9埃提高到了3.6埃，而且解析的对象是真正的剪接体。这在世界范围是第一次，是RNA剪接领域里程碑式的重大突破。

　　那些媒体引用施一公及其关系伙伴解释说：剪接体是由RNA（核酸）和蛋白质组成复合物；生命过程的根本规则被称为“中心法则”，是“DNA被转录成RNA，RNA被翻译成蛋白质”，蛋白质来执行具体的功能。这几天，生命科学领域的学者都在热议中国的（施一公团队的）重大成果。这项成果不仅标志着人类对生命过程和本质的理解又向前迈进了关键一步，也标志着困扰国际生命科学界二十几年的分子生物学“中心法则”中的一个关键步骤、一直以来充满神秘感的剪接体的三维结构终被揭示。（摘录完）。

　　简评：


　　首先，回答老网们，我不是搞诺奖预测的；我知道诺奖值得尊重的不是它的奖金名誉，而是它的颁奖所反映的西方学界动向。再说了，名奖大奖多了去了、小奖更是数不胜数，我不知道也不大关心谁和谁的科研将可能获得诺奖。但有一条却是我或任何人都敢说的：诺奖给谁和谁的科研，要有一定时间考察，不会论文发表后三两个月就颁发的。施一公等人的论文今年六月投寄和八月发表，今年十月份诺奖就会给他们颁奖了？嘿嘿，连评奖都说不上吧。当然，若今年诺奖找不到颁奖对象而必须颁奖了，那倒可以考虑中国的施一公了。

　　其次，且不说有些海外同行已经做到2.0埃（实验材料不同、但方法道理一样），就是有人用同样材料做到比施一公等人的小了仅0.1埃，那就意味着施一公等人的方法过时。换句话说，不管观察分析精细度如何，若是不能在功能发现说明方面拿出新东西，那几乎就只是蓝领工人重复前人的活了。（注：崔永元的美国调查发现，美国许多基因实验室里的中国面孔特多。那大都是蓝领技工。如此而已。）。

　　第三，施一公等人的科研及媒体大力鼓吹“中心法则”。所谓“中心法则”，俗称“一个基因、一个蛋白”，是克里克博士于1956年10月提出的，见美国官方记录：http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/SC/B/B/F/T/_/scbbft.pdf。1970年代，特敏博士就指明了“中心法则”是错误的。辩论中，克里克博士承认自己可能错了，详见：

　　克里克博士发给特敏博士的信件，1970-08-03（来源：美国卫生部）：
　　连接：http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/ps/access/SCBBMG.pdf 。
　　克里克博士发给特敏博士的信件，1970-09-17（来源：美国卫生部）：
　　连接：http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/ps/access/SCBBMD.pdf 。

　　后来，大约1990年代后期，学界大多数人都认为中心法则错了且被特敏博士推翻。而在 2004年03月，美国卫生部转文说明中心法则错了，如下：
　　A Basic Introduction to the Science Underlying NCBI Resources.
　　Revised: March 31， 2004.
　　连接：http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/About/primer/genetics_genome.html 。
　　From One Gene–One Protein to a More Global Perspective.
　　Therefore the one gene–one protein theory， originally framed as "one gene–one enzyme"， does not precisely hold.


　　专搞生物学那行的，却不知中心法则早已被科学实验证明是错误的，说的过去么？中心法则已被证明为错，在美国早已是中学生毕业就可知道的故事，可在美国和中国都有博士学位的施一公团队却似乎不知道，且还吹捧说其实验标志着“中心法则”一个关键步骤终被揭示云云，那不很奇怪么？

　　答曰：那是为转基因商业利益服务的，因而不奇怪。现有转基因食品作物的科学依据就是那个错误的中心法则。那个法则错了，意味着现有转基因食品作物的科学依据是错的，难免甚至必须淘汰。那势必严重妨碍转基因商业集团的金钱利益。于是，为维护自己的金钱利益，挺转帮们就不择手段地试图诋毁或否定可能推翻中心法则的科研技术，同时继续不择手段地鼓吹中心法则。很清楚，施一公团队及相关媒体大吹特吹中心法则、甚至还搬用诺贝尔奖名义，不过是为转基因商业利益服务而已。



　　就施一公等的科研，还有英文报道，其中还引用因剪接体发现而获得诺贝尔奖的美国夏普博士（Dr. Phillip A Sharp）发给施一公的电子邮件而猛搞吹捧，其原文如下：



　　Tsinghua biologists solve genetic puzzle.
　　China Daily， 2015-08-24 09:37
　　连接：http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/chi ... ontent_21684652.htm
　　"The structure of the spliceosome represents a much greater challenge than the structure of the ribosome， for which three individuals in the past were awarded the Nobel Prize，" Phillip Sharp， a 1993 Nobel Prize winner for physiology or medicine， said in an e-mail to Shi， which the university released to China Daily.
　　"The structure of the spliceosome was solved completely by Chinese scientists using state-of-the-art technologies，" he said. "It's a milestone achievement in Chinese life sciences， and it will encourage the next generation to enter the field and target the most challenging and highest-impact projects with the knowledge that Shi Yigong's laboratory took on an impossible challenge and succeeded on a world stage." （摘录完）。



　　就此，我给夏普博士发函，把中英文报道发给他、并向他提了一些问题：

　　譬如，我问：报道引用您（夏普博士）的邮件说，施一公的科研是中国生命科学的里程碑；中国媒体和施一公他们说那是“世界第一次”。到底谁是发现说明剪接体的第一者？是您、还是施一公他们？

　　我还问道：中国媒体和施一公他们说那剪接体科研如何为中心法则做出了多伟大的贡献。然而，特敏博士早就推翻了中心法则并因此获得诺贝尔科学奖；美国卫生部文献也早已说明了这一点。由是，您的剪接体发现及论述是不是中心法则的一部分或为之做出了贡献？施一公他们的是否也如此呢？

　　我又问道：中国媒体说施一公他们那论文可使他们获得诺贝尔奖。您认为施一公他们是否能因该论文而获得诺奖、您自己是否将向诺奖推荐他们？



　　夏普博士给我做了答复，邮件原文如下（为防止垃圾邮件，信箱地址做了隐蔽处理）：



　　From: Phillip A Sharp .
　　Wed 9/23/2015 8:26 AM.

　　Dear Zhiyan，
　　Below is my exact statement concerning the beautiful papers by Yigong. They were sent on August 22nd and I have made no further comments since then and will have no further comments.
　　Phil #



　　Dear Yipong，
　　Thank you for sending copies of the two exciting papers. The models of the structure of the spliceosome and its catalytic core are very provocative and represent a breakthrough in research on RNA splicing. I was not sure that we would ever see the structure of the spliceosome in its active state given the complexity of the proteins and RNAs that form it. Cryo-EM， commitment and creative thought as demonstrated in these papers are equal to the task.
　　Congratulations on this amazing advance!
　　Phillip Sharp （夏普邮件原文完）。





　　大意：附后是我的关于施一公的漂亮论文所言；之后，我没再做、也将不再做进一步评论。（注：在美国读过研究生的应该能体会到，夏普博士那措辞颇有“我已经说了我可以说的话，请别再拿施一公事情来打搅我”的味道。）。

　　而附件即夏普博士发给施一公的邮件呢，完全不是上述报道所说的内容；从文风或风格看，两者也是大不相同。就是说，该英文报道所谓的夏普博士给施一公的邮件，是伪造的。

　　注意一个细节：夏普给我的答复特地说明，他收到施一公发给他的论文后、于08月22日给施一公做了答复。那是北京时间08月23日。而相关报道是北京时间24日早09点半多发表的。就是说，在大约一天或不到一天的时间里，伪造信件和虚假新闻及其编辑排版等等都做好了。

　　该英文报道说，他们是从清华大学那里获得的夏普博士给施一公的电子邮件。如此，施一公及清华大学有法律责任和道德义务、给公众做个清楚交代：谁搞的伪造？谁搞了那个用伪造的诺奖获得者信件搞自我吹捧的事情？对此学术不端行为，将如何处理？

　　就那种伪造外国学界信件的事情，以前也发生过。譬如，邹承鲁何祚庥两位院士，大搞以反中医为主要内容的反伪科学活动，用诬告手段迫害张颖清教授而造成人命案。真相败露，他们就用伪造诺贝尔奖基金会给他们的信件的手段为自己搞狡辩。为吹捧，他们和关系媒体也借诺奖名义搞撒谎欺骗、说邹承鲁是“与诺奖擦肩而过”云云。又譬如，方舟子造假行为被披露了，为伙伴狡辩，国籍造假的海归饶毅伪造了美国学术刊物信件、说方舟子没造假云云；其伪造信件速度也是够快的。那些伪造者都是宣传部门媒体常用来当“学棍”打人的人，彼此有利益关系。结果呢，那些伪造行为不但没得到任何处理，相反，那些伪造者持续在那些媒体出现、合伙对持有不同见解的人搞舆论轰炸攻击。

　　就此看，在关系媒体配合下，施一公及清华大学用伪造的诺奖获得者邮件搞自我吹捧，以伪造自抬的所谓“学术权威”实际上充当“学棍”来对崔永元等披露挺转帮谣言欺骗真相的公民搞攻击，他们的造假欺骗行为不但猖獗且能继续逍遥法外，也不奇怪了吧。套用流行的“狗咬人不是新闻、人咬狗才是新闻”的说法，可以说：挺转帮撒谎欺骗不是新闻、挺转帮能讲真话才是新闻。


　　附件：美国夏普博士（因剪接体发现说明而获得诺贝尔科学奖）给我的回复的截图。
　　对比看，英文报道的所谓夏普博士给施一公的信件是伪造的。

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

分享0 收藏1 回帖

关键词：诺奖获得者 清华大学 获得者 施一公 Technologies 清华大学 人民日报 诺贝尔奖 光明日报 里程碑

清华又出一个透明计算，想不到清华竟然无耻到伪造诺奖得主的信件

中国的学术界一直让我迷糊,谁对谁错,什么才是真相呢?

这个值得相信一下

需要有人出来较一下真。

自然科学和社会科学却又不同，主要在于它有过实实在在的东西，判断价值远比经济学容易。杨振宁李政道1956年发表论文，吴健雄很快以实验证实，1957杨李便得诺奖。如果施一公团队做出的东西很快得到认可，那么很快获奖并非不可能的事。

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/chi ... ontent_21684652.htm

Tsinghua biologists solve genetic puzzle
By CHENG YINGQI (China Daily)
Updated: 2015-08-24 09:37

A team of molecular biologists at Tsinghua University reported a milestone breakthrough in molecular biology and gene expression on Sunday.

As DNA is no longer a mystery, many scientists have shifted their interest toward the manufacturing process－how the information stored in DNA is delivered to produce proteins with different functions, such as forming a person's skin, organs and hair.

On Sunday, scientist Shi Yigong and his team at Tsinghua University's School of Life Sciences, reported the structure of a substance called spliceosome, which is crucial in gene expression. Results of the team's analysis on its functioning mechanism were published in Science, the academic journal.

"The structure of the spliceosome represents a much greater challenge than the structure of the ribosome, for which three individuals in the past were awarded the Nobel Prize," Dr. Dinshaw Patel, a senior scientist from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and member of the National Academy of Sciences, US, said in an e-mail released by Tsinghua University to China Daily.

"The structure of the spliceosome was solved completely by Chinese scientists using state-of-the-art technologies," he said.

"It's a milestone achievement in Chinese life sciences, and it will encourage the next generation to enter the field and target the most challenging and highest-impact projects with the knowledge that Shi Yigong's laboratory took on an impossible challenge and succeeded on a world stage."

Gao Fu, a member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, explained the function of spliceosome using stone architecture as an analogy: "When you build a stone building, you have to first cut the stone into the right shape. That is what spliceosome does, it cuts the redundant part in RNA (ribonucleic acid) so that the gene will be expressed in the right way."

Despite spliceosome being related with 35 percent of genetic disorders in humans, scientists had previously been unable to figure out its structure, not to mention conduct further research into some genetic diseases.

"When I was a postdoctoral researcher, my boss, a Nobel Prize winner, always wanted to study spliceosome because it is one of the ultimate unsolved puzzles every molecular biologist wants to crack," said Shi. Yet the scientist did not manage to start the research until just six years ago.

Shi opened his own laboratory at Tsinghua University in 2007 and spent the first two years training students and building up the expertise and confidence of his staff members. By 2009, the lab already had some research results published internationally, "so I decided it was the time to take the challenge", he said.

"I can't explain why we were the first team to find the structure of spliceosome," he said. "One possible factor is that my students, all young and outstanding, bravely changed some internationally used arithmetic, while another could be that we've been doing the research with cryoelectron microscopy－the right equipment capable of observing such complex structures."

Tsinghua biologists solve genetic puzzle

2015-08-24 05:10:54 GMT2015-08-24 13:10:54(Beijing Time)  Xinhua English

http://english.sina.com/2015/0823/841577.html
By Cheng Yingqi

BEIJING, Aug. 24 (Xinhuanet) -- A team of molecular biologists at Tsinghua University reported a milestone breakthrough in molecular biology and gene expression on Sunday.

As DNA is no longer a mystery, many scientists have shifted their interest toward the manufacturing process－how the information stored in DNA is delivered to produce proteins with different functions, such as forming a person's skin, organs and hair.

On Sunday, scientist Shi Yigong and his team at Tsinghua University's School of Life Sciences, reported the structure of a substance called spliceosome, which is crucial in gene expression. Results of the team's analysis on its functioning mechanism were published in Science, the academic journal.

"The structure of the spliceosome represents a much greater challenge than the structure of the ribosome, for which three individuals in the past were awarded the Nobel Prize," Phillip Sharp, a 1993 Nobel Prize winner for physiology or medicine, said in an e-mail to Shi, which the university released to China Daily.

"The structure of the spliceosome was solved completely by Chinese scientists using state-of-the-art technologies," he said.

"It's a milestone achievement in Chinese life sciences, and it will encourage the next generation to enter the field and target the most challenging and highest-impact projects with the knowledge that Shi Yigong's laboratory took on an impossible challenge and succeeded on a world stage."

Gao Fu, a member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, explained the function of spliceosome using stone architecture as an analogy: "When you build a stone building, you have to first cut the stone into the right shape. That is what spliceosome does, it cuts the redundant part in RNA (ribonucleic acid) so that the gene will be expressed in the right way."

Despite spliceosome being related with 35 percent of genetic disorders in humans, scientists had previously been unable to figure out its structure, not to mention conduct further research into some genetic diseases.

"When I was a postdoctoral researcher, my boss, a Nobel Prize winner, always wanted to study spliceosome because it is one of the ultimate unsolved puzzles every molecular biologist wants to crack," said Shi. Yet the scientist did not manage to start the research until just six years ago.

Shi opened his own laboratory at Tsinghua University in 2007 and spent the first two years training students and building up the confidence of his staff members. By 2009, the lab already had some research results published internationally, "so I decided it was the time to accomplish my dream", he said.

Compared with his competitors in the international science community－seven world-class labs, including in the US, the UK and Germany－Shi was lucky to be the one who made the breakthrough.

"I can't explain why we were the first team to find the structure of spliceosome," he said. "One possible factor is that my students, all young and outstanding, bravely changed some internationally used arithmetic, while another could be that we've been doing the research with cryoelectron microscopy－the right equipment capable of observing such complex structures."

(Source: Chinadaily.com)

1篇报道，2个版本，哪个是真的，

宁愿相信是假。获诺奖一般是静悄悄的，不存在还没有得到提名之前就大肆宣扬的作法，这种手法有点像江湖骗子的吆喝！