Posts Tagged ‘Harvard’

Has Harvard been hiding illegals as employees?

July 30, 2025

Of course Columbia, Harvard and the other Ivy League and Californian woke-nests of disease have been the centres for the creation, release and spread of the the woke “freaks and monsters” viruses. Some of these viruses are now meeting resistance and even being destroyed though eradication is a long way away. I have no doubt that Harvard has been one of the centres (especially in their “humanities” faculties) promoting the spread of the US depravity sickness. Whether just battering the viperous, poisonous vectors over the head will control the sickness remains to be seen. It may be necessary to use more sophisticated and drastic measures to get the vectors to self-destruct. Flame throwers perhaps.

In any event the Harvard battle with Trump and his administration provides me with some entertainment. Columbia has settled (about $200 million). Ultimately the deals will be done. Every deal Trump makes starts with an outrageous demand and he later backs off to a settlement position. But the fundamental rule of any deal anywhere is always to be first with the outrageous demand. The more you dare to ask for the more you get is Dealmaking 101. I note that the initially outrageous Trump tariff deals are all getting done – bilaterally. And all better deals than the status quo was for the US.

I thought Harvard’s DEI selections of President and other posts was not just perverse, it was depraved. (It has always amused me that diversity of political opinion is always anathema to DEI). The manner in which Harvard (and not only Harvard) allowed antisemitic factions and Islamic terrorist supporters to take prominent, protected academic positions, and even take over whole departments, was disgraceful and cowardly. The battles with the Trump administration are going to take a while. In the latest news Harvard has apparently given in to providing some information to government about their employees. These are the I-9 forms which are mandatory for any employee anywhere. That Harvard was not providing this government required form, back to the government, can only mean that they are/were knowingly hiding illegal immigrants as employees.

Harvard Crimson: 

Harvard will turn over I-9 forms for nearly all employees in response to an inquiry by the Department of Homeland Security, the University’s human resources office wrote in an email to current and recent employees on Tuesday afternoon.

The University will not immediately turn over information on students who are currently or were recently employed in roles open only to students. Harvard is evaluating whether those records are protected by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, according to the Tuesday email.

An I-9 form is a federal document used to verify a person’s authorization to work in the United States. All employers must complete and retain an I-9 for every employee, who are required to attest to their citizenship or immigration status and provide supporting documentation. …..

Under federal regulations, the DHS may conduct I-9 form inspections and require U.S. employers to make them available for inspection. The July 8 notice of inspection gave Harvard three days to turn over the requested information. …..

……   And on Wednesday last week, the State Department launched a separate investigation into Harvard’s participation in the Exchange Visitor Program, which permits the University to sponsor J-1 visas for international instructors, researchers, and some students.

But Harvard is far from the only institution that has faced I-9 inspections as part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. The Trump administration has used I-9 audits to exact multimillion-dollar fines from companies that employed unauthorized workers.

The I-9 form, officially called the Employment Eligibility Verification Form, is a U.S. federal form used by employers to verify the identity and legal authorization of individuals hired for employment in the United States. The purpose is to ensure that all employees (citizens and non-citizens) are legally allowed to work in the U.S. This is part of the requirements under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.

Section 1 – Employee Information and Attestation
Completed by the employee no later than the first day of employment and Includes: Full name, Other names used (if any), Address, Date of birth, Social Security number (mandatory if the employer uses E-Verify), Email address and phone number (optional), Citizenship/immigration status.

The employee must sign and date this section to attest the accuracy and truthfulness of the information.

Section 2 – Employer Review and Verification
Completed by the employer within 3 business days of the employee’s start date. This section includes Document title(s), Issuing authority, Document number(s), Expiration date(s), 

The employer must physically examine original documents from the employee to verify: Identity (e.g., driver’s license), employment authorization (e.g., Social Security card, permanent resident card, U.S. passport). Documents are categorized into three lists:

  • List A: Documents that prove both identity and work authorization (e.g., U.S. passport)
  • List B: Documents that prove identity only (e.g., driver’s license)
  • List C: Documents that prove work authorization only (e.g., Social Security card)

The employer attests (with signature and date) that they have reviewed the documents and believe them to be genuine.

Section 3 – Reverification and Rehires
Used only when 

  • An employee’s work authorization has expired
  • An employee is rehired within 3 years of the original I-9

Retention Requirements:
Employers must retain the completed I-9 for: 3 years after the date of hire, or 1 year after the date employment ends—whichever is later. 

They must be made available for inspection by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), or Department of Labor (DOL).

The I-9 is a government required form for the government and if Harvard has not been providing the information it can only be for nefarious purposes. 

My guess would be about $500 million, the death of DEI and the culling of the sociology departments of infectious “animals”, is the price Harvard will have to pay to settle. And, of course, they will settle.

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Academic misconduct, Behaviour, Corruption | Comments Off on Has Harvard been hiding illegals as employees?

Of course Claudine Gay was selected because she was black and female

December 13, 2023

UPDATE!

It becomes increasingly clear that Dr (?) Claudine Gay has committed many small plagiarisms starting perhaps even earlier than her doctoral thesis. Each plagiarism event does not, in itself, seem very serious. But taken altogether they have a weight which makes it crystal clear that having plagiarised or not is just not relevant for being Harvard President. She is, after all, black and female.

If Claudine Gay was not black and female she would not be President of Harvard.

In my view, ethnicity and gender are perfectly valid criteria for selection of people for particular tasks and specific positions. I am surprised at the clamour of politically correct voices trying to claim that these were not the deciding factors in selecting Claudine Gay. It borders on stupid to deny common sense. I don’t see anything wrong either in choosing an administrative leader who fulfills the primary condition of being seen as politically correct. For whatever reason the Harvard search committee decided that it was necessary to have a female, black President. Fine. That is/was their prerogative. For many positions – and not least President of Harvard – the image projected by the incumbent may be paramount. There are many instances where style and form are more important than substance. Technical competence is of secondary concern when skilled subordinates are available. What I find quite ridiculous are the attempts to claim that Claudine Gay would have been chosen as President if she was not black and not female. There is nothing wrong in being selected for being black and female. The stupidity lies in denying that.

It seems the duties of the Harvard President are primarily administrative and for fund raising.

Recently, however, the job has become increasingly administrative, especially as fund-raising campaigns have taken on central importance in large institutions such as Harvard. Some have criticized this trend to the extent it has prevented the president from focusing on substantive issues in higher education.

Each president is professor in some department of the university and teaches from time to time.

Harvard’s current president is Claudine Gay, having become Harvard’s 30th president on July 1, 2023. She succeeded Lawrence Bacow who retired on June 30, 2023. – Wikipedia

Since only Professors are eligible to be selected as President, the available choices of black, female professors must have been fairly limited. Of course it could be critically important for the selected person to project the desired image and to be seen to be politically correct. I do not see any objection to using these as criteria for selection. Droupadi Murmu would not be the President of India if she was not a woman and belonging to the tribal community.

Claudine Gay may prove to be a very able administrator and brilliant at garnering funding. That would be a great bonus since she was selected for being black and female. She certainly was not chosen for her unimpressive research record.  Her research publications consist of six while at Harvard according to Research Gate and up to 13 in total. (The titles are not very enticing and indicate rather mundane work. To me most of the abstracts read like sociological psycho-babble). This is rather a flimsy research record but this was not the guiding criterion for her selection. Now Claudine Gay has even been accused of plagiarism. It is a little more serious but seems not to be a major breach. Of course she is being judged much less harshly than a plagiarising student would be. So what? College Presidents are not students. Different standards tailored for different people sounds sensible, correct and perfectly logical to me. In any event, her few publications could not have been of any great significance in her selection. She has no great track record in administration either, but this probably does not matter very much when the Harvard President’s office has enough lackeys to administer the necessities. Clearly the primary target for the search committee was for a female, black professor who could project the right image and be politically attractive in the funding stakes.

Should she resign? Perhaps. Of course her recent inept congressional testimony was embarrassing. It demonstrated incompetence in the key task of representing the college. She is now a point of weakness in any future attacks on Harvard. She brings to a head the inherent conflict between “diversity” and competence. Only her future achievements may mitigate the general perception that she was selected for displaying “diversity” purposes rather than for any displayed competence. Her position – and Harvard’s –  on condemning terrorism also seems very suspect. (My perception is that she along with most Harvard academics blindly condemn all Israel’s actions but are apologists for even the most heinous Hamas actions). Obviously she cannot provide any kind of unifying point between the Palestinian supporters and the Jewish community. In fact she will find it difficult to get away from her now self-established position that “calling for the genocide of certain people in certain contexts” is acceptable. She may herself find the heat not worth bearing and resign. But if the Harvard Corporation thinks she can still represent Harvard’s values and be a good President then they have no need to call for her resignation. Their unanimous support for Gay was announced yesterday and that now places them directly into the firing line. There are many allegations and accusations flying about. If the allegation turns out to be true that during “her tenure as Dean and now as president, Gay has squelched speech she disfavors while defending and thereby amplifying vile and threatening hate speech, exhibiting a remarkable double standard”, then the Corporation’s support may vanish. With the President and 11 Fellows the Corporation consists of 12 members. The Fellows can all now expect to face critical scrutiny themselves from nosy, hostile parties. They should all ensure that their tax returns are in order. I note that their letter does at least acknowledge that the University should have ‘immediately, directly and unequivocally’ condemned Hamas terrorism, but nobody is being held accountable for that imbecilic lapse.

There is no question that the selection criteria and her selection by Harvard were perfectly proper. Not very smart but perfectly proper. But let us not pretend that Claudine Gay would be President if she was not black and female.

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, Education | Comments Off on Of course Claudine Gay was selected because she was black and female

Whither global warming? Not Harvard

February 10, 2015

Climate is an integral of local weather over time and space . If climate change (specifically global warming) does not show up as weather then it does not exist. From The Harvard Crimson:

Snow on Plympton

A student walks down Plympton St. on Monday evening, flanked by growing piles of snow. – Harvard Crimson

 As many Harvard schools cancel classes Tuesday for the third time in as many weeks — only its fourth snow day since one in 1978—administrators have begun to consider ways to compensate for lost instructional time. ……. 

……. Harvard has had only five snow days in the last four decades; before this semester, the only other two were in 2013 and 1978. …..

 …….. Between 2013 and 2015, Harvard has seen four of its five snow days in four decades. In 1977, before a snow day in 1978, former Dean of Students Archie C. Epps III joked that, “Harvard University will close only for an act of God, such as the end of the world.”

It wasn’t a joke.

Clearly snow days are to be taken as an Act of God where I take “God” to represent the natural variations in weather (and climate) which are beyond the wit of man to influence. But it does take some imagination for a winter snow storm to be equated to the “end of the world”. A summer snow storm might better qualify!

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Alarmism, Climate | Comments Off on Whither global warming? Not Harvard

Marc Hauser actively manipulated data

May 30, 2014

Marc Hauser – and his supporters – have generally maintained that his misconduct was – at worst – negligence and certainly inadvertent. But the Boston Globe today reports on an internal Harvard report (obtained under FoI) which details wrongdoings rather more deliberate and sinister than Hauser and his friends have ever acknowledged or admitted.

The report is fairly damning.

Boston Globe:

But a copy of an internal Harvard report released to the Globe under the Freedom of Information Act now paints a vivid picture of what actually happened in the Hauser lab and suggests it was not mere negligence that led to the problems. 

The 85-page report details instances in which Hauser changed data so that it would show a desired effect. It shows that he more than once rebuffed or downplayed questions and concerns from people in his laboratory about how a result was obtained. The report also describes “a disturbing pattern of misrepresentation of results and shading of truth” and a “reckless disregard for basic scientific standards.”

A three-member Harvard committee reviewed 40 internal and external hard drives, interviewed 10 people, and examined original video and paper files that led them to conclude that Hauser had manipulated and falsified data.

Their report was sent to the federal Office of Research Integrity in 2010, but it was not released to the Globe by the agency until this week. ……… Much has been redacted from the report, including the identities of those who did the painstaking investigation and those who brought the problems to light.

Hauser, reached by phone Thursday, said he is focused on his work with at-risk youth on Cape Cod and declined to comment on the report.

The manipulation reported dates back at least to 2002 where he reported (presumably manufactured) data on a videotape of monkey responses which did not exist. In 2005 he altered data to make what was statistically insignificant become significant. Also in 2005, he discarded data after it had been found by a subordinate to have been inconsistent (presumably manipulated). Later, he tried to claim his mail ordering the discarding of the data as evidence of his innocence:

“These may not be the words of someone trying to alter data, but they could certainly be the words of someone who had previously altered data: having been confronted with a red highlighted spreadsheet showing previous alterations, it made more sense to proclaim disappointment about ‘errors’ and suggest recoding everything than, for example, sitting down to compare data sets to see how the ‘errors’ occurred,”

In 2007,

 a member of the laboratory wanted to recode an experiment involving rhesus monkey behavior, due to “inconsistencies” in the coding. “I am getting a bit pissed here. There were no inconsistencies!” Hauser responded, explaining how an analysis was done. 

Later that day, the person resigned from the lab. 

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Academic misconduct, Behaviour, psychology, scientific misconduct | Comments Off on Marc Hauser actively manipulated data

Hausergate: When did Hauser start making it up?

August 30, 2010

By all accounts Marc Hauser has been falsifying data at least since 1995.

Harvard probe kept under wraps

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100817/full/466908a.html

http://culture.froggytest.com/modules/xoopsgallery/cache/albums/albup60/le_charlatan.jpg

He joined Harvard in 1992 and the first known data falsification was in 1995, so Harvard colleagues and associates could not have been unaware of his creative use of data. All the journals which published his papers since 1995 and all his peers and reviewers must also have been aware of his fertile imagination. It could just be gullibility or it could be incompetence but they can have few other excuses.
Their silence is telling.
But when did his creativity start?

All his work must now be suspect. From his PhD in 1987 from UCLA, and through to his post-doctoral “work” at Ann Arbor, Michigan, at the University of California, Davis and at Rockefeller University, and all his production at Harvard, the presumption must be of  exaggerations (which is probably how it started) and falsification.

The magnitude of his fraud must encompass at least his salary and grants ever since he joined Harvard.


Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Non-Science, Scientific Fraud | 3 Comments »

Misconduct at Harvard or is it scientific fraud?

August 11, 2010

Harvard does not want to say very much but the story was broken by the Boston Globe.

Harvard University psychologist Marc Hauser — a well-known scientist and author of the book “Moral Minds’’ — is taking a year-long leave after a lengthy internal investigation found evidence of scientific misconduct in his laboratory.

Scientist Marc Hauser’s studies include work on the cognitive and evolutionary underpinnings of language.

As reported in Nature:

A 3-year investigation has found evidence of scientific misconduct in publications by prominent Harvard University psychologist Marc Hauser, the Boston Globe reports today.

Hauser’s research, which has frequently been highlighted in newspapers and on television, has addressed the evolutionary roots of human language, mathematical ability, and morality. His 2006 book, Moral Minds, argued that the human brain is programmed to embrace certain moral principles. Earlier this year, Hauser co-authored a study that found no impact of religion on how humans respond to moral dilemmas (for more, see ‘Morals don’t come from God’).

But by then, Hauser’s lab was already the subject of a Harvard University investigation. According to the Globe article, the trouble centers on a 2002 paper published in the journal Cognition (subscription required). Hauser was the first author on the paper, which found that cotton-top tamarins are able to learn patterns – previously thought to be an important step in language acquisition. The paper has been retracted, for reasons which are reportedly unclear even to the journal’s editor, Gerry Altmann.

Two other papers, a 2007 article in Proceedings of the Royal Society B and a 2007 Science paper, were also flagged for investigation. A correction has been published on the first, and Science is now looking into concerns about the second. And the Globe article highlights other controversies, including a 2001 paper in the American Journal of Primatology, which has not been retracted although Hauser himself later said he was unable to replicate the results. Findings in a 1995 PNAS paper were also questioned by an outside researcher, Gordon Gallup of the State University of New York at Albany, who reviewed the original data and said he found “not a thread of compelling evidence” to support the paper’s conclusions.

This sounds more like fraud.

Not for the first time at Harvard and surely not the last.

How many “peers” have been duped along the way?

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Ethics, Non-Science, Philosophy | Comments Off on Misconduct at Harvard or is it scientific fraud?