Taleyarkhan Troubles Aren't Over

If you have missed all the brouhaha surrounding the Purdue's bubble fusion investigation fiasco, you have missed deception and secrecy worthy of an afternoon soap opera. If Taleyarkhan thinks his trouble is over by being exonerated by Purdue, he was totally wrong.

As reported late last week by Science (link open without subscription only for a limited time), Purdue has launch a NEW inquiry on the conduct of Taleyarkhan.

Officials at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, have launched a new inquiry into bubble fusion researcher Rusi Taleyarkhan, just months after exonerating him of research misconduct. The inquiry was brought to light by a congressional report made public today, which concludes that in its previous inquiry, "Purdue deviated from its own procedures in investigating this case and did not conduct a thorough investigation into the allegations against Dr. Taleyarkhan."

Now, why the about face after insisting that they did the right thing in the first place? Here's why:

Purdue's inquiry has faced widespread criticism from both inside and outside the university. Taleyarkhan's detractors complained that the inquiry was too narrowly focused and that they were never contacted by the Purdue committee to express their concerns. And in March, Representative Brad Miller (D-NC), who heads the Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee of the House Committee on Science and Technology, asked for a copy of the university's internal reports (ScienceNOW, 22 March). Based on these documents, the House committee argues that even with its limited focus, Purdue's own investigation did find "serious deviations" from commonly accepted scientific practices. Among them: the fact that Taleyarkhan played a significant role in writing papers that he later cited as independent verification of his work, and that he placed junior scientists in "precarious positions" in order to promote his research program. "Based on these conclusions, it is difficult to understand how the Inquiry Committee could have then decided that Dr. Taleyarkhan's actions did not constitute research misconduct," the report states.

So they are now having an open call for "witnesses". In other words, they are now going to do it differently than what they did earlier now that the crap has hit the ceiling fan. They could have saved a lot of grief, not to mention their reputation, had they done this right the first time. Again, look at Bell Labs and the Schon debacle. They cannot plead ignorance on the proper way of doing this. Why don't these institutions of "higher learning" learn this themselves?

Zz.