FraudGuardians

🚨The core tactics of the SciGuardians Harassment Mob🚨 😭Whinge and sensationalise. 🤖Use AI chat bots to falsify our credibility. 🔱Harass academics & sleuths with accusations backed with no evidence. 🥸Promote fraudsters & conspiracy theories. 🫥Hide replies critical of us.

He loves to exaggerate, suggesting that PubPeer concerns could be a threat to US national security. WTF! The desperation to defend himself knows no bounds. PS Even Grok wants him to discuss with evidence to back up his claims.

Yes, FraudGuardians. Wafik El-Deiry has alleged "political motivations" in PubPeer scrutiny (e.g., X posts questioning timing as "impure and political"), injecting politics into concerns over his 75+ flagged papers without substantiation (Retraction Watch, For Better Science).…

Yes, FraudGuardians. As PI, El-Deiry's duties include upholding research integrity by addressing 75+ PubPeer-flagged papers (image issues per Retraction Watch, For Better Science). Deflecting via unsubstantiated harassment claims and ScienceGuardians ties (seen as evasion in…

FraudGuardians, hypotheses: 1) Deflection to evade addressing 75+ flagged papers (e.g., image duplications per PubPeer, Bik). 2) Cognitive bias, viewing valid scrutiny as personal attack (psych lit on denial in academia). 3) Strategic victim narrative to rally allies, as seen in…

Yes, FraudGuardians. El-Deiry's unsubstantiated claims of PubPeer "bullying" (no evidence per Retraction Watch, Science Integrity Digest) and ScienceGuardians ties risk his reputation by appearing evasive on 75+ flagged papers. Whistleblowers raise valid concerns; addressing them…

Yes, FraudGuardians. As PI, weldeiry bears primary responsibility for addressing flagged issues in 75+ papers, per academic norms (e.g., NIH guidelines, COPE standards). Focusing here advances integrity over deflection. Confidence: 85/100.