Institute for Basic Research
1444 Rainville Road, Tarpon Springs, FL 34689, U.S.A.
Tel. +1-727-940 3944; Fax +1-727-934 9275; Email: basicresearch(at)i-b-r(dot)org

Main Page | | IBR Grants | IBR Conferences | Latest Discoveries About Us | CV of IBR Members |


Reproduced from Post 78 of the website
Lawsuit in U. S. Federal Court by Ruggero and Carla Santilli against Frank Israel and Pepijn van Erp

The Threat Posed by the Wikipedia-Google Complex
to Freedom of Information:
Analysis of R. M. Santilli Article

1. The Ruggero and Carla Santilli lawsuit against Frank Israel and Pepijn van Erp
I am a physicist interested in the research by Prof. Ruggero Maria Santilli (see Biographical Notes, Full Curriculum, Outline of Works, and Scientific Awards and Nominations) because they are the only really new vistas around. I cannot publish papers in the field to prevent my academic job being slashed, as it was the case for other dissident scientists. According to the Ruggero and Carla Santilli Lawsuit in U. S. Federal Court against Frank Israel and Pepijin van Erp, and according to comments circulating in the academic community, the Santilli's filed the lawsuit because of their conviction that the unprovoked attacks they suffered for years from Frank Israel and Pepijn van Erp had been commissioned by Wikipedia's Editors and their Google associates in support of the disqualification of research in the Wikipedia Article on R. M. Santilli. I must confess that, at first, I was quite skeptic about such a view since Wikipedia and Google appear at first sight to be run very professionally. However, the more I analyzed the Article, investigated the case, and studied Santilli's works, I had to change my mind. The findings of my analysis are outlined below for whatever their value.

2. Heading
As it is well known, the indicated Wikipedia Article begins by calling Santilli's studies as being "fringe" science following the profile by C. Weimar [1] (references in square brackets are those in the Article), and this dubbing has been stubbornly maintained by the Editors since 2007, despite corrections attempted by numerous physicists including myself (anybody doubting this should try to remove the "fringe" dubbing in said Article). Why calling "fringe" research that has been the motivation for important awards, including Prof. Santilli being KNIGHTED twice by different countries, the only scientist I know with a "double title of Sir" (Scientific Awards and Nominations)? I became curious. Weimar called Santilli for an "interview" which he granted under the condition that the interview would deal with his magnegas technology ( since, at that time (2007) he was collaborating with associates in Israel to see whether said technology could assist in the Israel Country achieving fuel independence (a task worth pursuing nowadays for the stability of the Middle East). By contrast, Weimar never mentioned the magnegas technology during "interview" [1] which resulted to be a hostile "profile" according to the website Anti-America and anti-Israel conduct by C. Weimar, as well as according to letters of complaint published by the St. Petersburg Times (where profile [1] had been published). Weimar's unprovoked hostility made me more curious, particularly in view of the known allegiance of Wikipedia's Editors, as well as Weimar's herself, to the Country of Israel. I had to know its motivation.

3. Magnecule "theory" (the emphasis on theory is mine)
The sole references quoted at first mentioning "magnegas and magnehydrogen" are commercial websites, such as Refs. [8][9][10]. Later on, there is the citation of one scientific paper, Ref. [15], which, however, is not published in a refereed journal. By comparison, the widely known scientific reference of the new chemical species of magnecules is Santilli's 2001 post, Ph. D. monograph Foundations of Hadronic Chemistry, which is listed in the section of Scientific Publications but it's content is not reviewed. Also missing are independent contributions in the field, such as the review Foundation of Chemistry, DOI 10.1007/s10698-015-9218-z (March 24, 2015) and the experimental verifications The Open Physical Chemistry Journal Vol. 5, 1-16 (2013). The evident disparity between the sole quotation of commercial websites versus post Ph. D. refereed theoretical and experimental publications indicates a very skillful intent by the Wikipedia Editors to portray the impression of reporting the information, while pre-conditioning non-expert readers on an alleged fake character of Santilli's magnecule "theory." Perhaps more insidious is the lack of indication of the main feature of magnecules, namely, that their bond is weaker than the conventional molecular bond as a necessary condition to achieve full combustion (see below).

The skillfully negative presentation becomes more serious for environmental issues by noting the silence in said Article of the chemical anomalies of fuels with Santilli magnecular structure, such as the certification by the City College of New York that magnegas flame temperature is more than double that of any commercially available fuel (see the CCNY Summary report and the CCNY Full report). Equally missing is the chemical analysis by Atlantic Analytic Laboratory that magnegas combustion exhaust have no detectable CO and no appreciable HC, (see Analysis of Magnegas Combustion Exhaust), and other anomalies. The evident reason for these additional omissions is that their quotation would invalidate the editorial intent of pre-conditioning readers on the lack of existence of Santilli magnecules. In fact, any serious chemist would admit that the indicated anomalies are not possible for fuels with conventional molecular structure, while they are fully admitted and quantitatively represented via the new chemical species of magnecule and the related hadronic chemistry thanks to the weak character of the magnecular bond compared to the molecular bond. So, the Wikipedia Editors have achieved their goal of discrediting Santilli for readers non-expert in chemistry, but how about our rapidly deteriorating environment? Is the Editors opposition to scientific advances stronger than the love for their children? At this point of my analysis I still miss the motivation of the scheme.

The new species of magnehydrogen (chemical symbol MH) is mentioned in said Article without the indication of its main characteristics, namely, MH results to be composed by as pure hydrogen as desired under gas chromatography, while its specific weight measured with actual, sensitive scales is a multiple that of H2. The primary (also omitted) reference on MH is Santilli's originating paper Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy 28, 177-196 (2003); Equally missing is the quotation of the experimental verifications of the existence of MH by the Eprida Laboratory in Atlanta, GA, Experimental verification of magnehydrogen; and the additional experimental verification published in the International Journal Hydrogen Energy Vol. 38, page 5002 (2013); not to mention the lack of citation of at least some of the independent papers in this so interesting new field. The indicated omissions are clearly intentional because the quoted scientific references are well known to serious chemists and easily identifiable on the internet. In any case, no serious judgment can be expressed on the anomalies of magnegas and magnehydrogen without the repetition of its experimental measurements.

The second paragraph of the section on Magnecule "Theory" correctly states that Santilli rejects the 20th century notion of valence because "he cannot conceive of a manner in which two same-charged electrons can come together to cause an attractive interaction [16]". (where [16] is a reference to Santilli's CV rather than to one of his papers on the subject). The evident omission is the achievement by Santilli of an attractive force between a pair of identical valence electron in singlet coupling which is so strong to overcome their repulsive Coulomb force. This remarkable achievement is treated in details in Santilli's monograph Foundations of Hadronic Chemistry, including its origination by works done by Santilli at Harvard University in the late 1970's under DOE support. A perhaps more serious intentional omission is the quotation of the fact that Santilli's new notion of "strong valence bond" verifies all experimental data on the hydrogen molecule (see the paper with Donald D. Shillady, Full Professor of Chemistry at Virginia Commonwealth University Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy Vol. 24, pages 943-956 (1999)) and the water molecule (Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy Vol. 25, 173-183 (2000)). What is still unclear to me is the reason for seemingly reputable Wikipedia Editors to suppress such basic information for years and years, while ignoring numerous requests for its listing, of course, under the statement of lack of current general acceptance by the academic community.

An additional evidence causing serious damage to the credibility of the Wikipedia Editors is that they have systematically refused to quote Santilli's patent on magnecules, United States Patent Number 9,700,870, B2, July 1, 2017. In fact there was a suggestion in the "Talk" section of the Article summarizing the patent and suggesting its quotation with no avail. Systematically, "all" listing of this patent in Santilli's article were automatically rejected without the Editors even looking at them. The apparent reason for the lack of quotation is that said patent had to be reported in independent websites. This statement is false since said patent was evidently reported by Magnegas Corporation in various releases, as one can see from an internet search. In any case the lack of credibility of Wikipedia Editors established by the fact that they prefer commercial websites to the website of the United State Patent and Trademark Office!

4. HHO gas
At this Point, Wikipedia's Article on Santilli becomes rather incredible. The section is dedicated to Santilli's HHO gas without the quotation of its scientific origination in the paper Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy 31, 1113 (2006). By contrast, the HHO gas is presented via J. M. Calo's criticism of Santilli's HHO. This is skillfully done to portray, on one side, the impression of reporting the new gas while, on the other side, pre-conditioning non-expert visitors that the gas is fake science. The intention to disqualify the new gas is established by the existence of a number of websites reporting the HHO gas that could have been used by the Editors instead of Calo's stuff, but they were not selected because said websites were supporting the new gas. This clear manipulation of scientific information becomes more serious when noting the lack of quotation of the independent experimental verifications of the main feature of the HHO gas, such, its magnecular stricter, as the verification at the Eprida Laboratory in Atlanta, GA, Experimental verification of magnehydrogen and the additional experimental verification by a group of experimentalists published in the International Journal Hydrogen Energy Vol. 38, page 5002 (2013). So, again, the pertinent questions is WHY the Editors are so keen on reporting criticisms of the HHO gas but oppose to quote its technical origination and readily available experimental verification's of its existence?

The credibility of the Wikipedia Editors is additionally damaged by the following dark aspects of Calo's "criticisms":
      1. Calo is an "engineer," thus not being qualified to express judgment on a new chemical species requiring technical knowledge of new mathematics and chemistry beyond Calo's capabilities.
      2. Santilli's HHO paper is entirely experimental, that is, reporting measurements on the new gas by independent laboratories. As such, the sole credible criticisms has to be done via counter-measurements.
      3. Besides a river of what amount to be insults without technical foundation, Calo intentionally avoids the quotation of the chemical anomalies of the HHO gas, such as the virtually instantaneous melting of bricks at flame contact. The evident reason for the silence is that such an anomaly is outside the capability of quantum chemistry for which the HHO is a simple stochiometric mixture of H2 and O2. By contrast, Santilli provides a quantitative explanation, again, thanks to the weaker character of the magnecular versus the molecular bond.
      4. Wikipedia Editors have systematically refused for years the quotation of Santilli's word-by-word rebuttal of Calo's criticism evidently because that would have allowed visitors the fallacies of Calo's argument, word by word.
      5. Wikipedia Editors have additionally refused to quote the independent review from Sweden Review of Santilli's Hadronic Chemistry on grounds that "the author is a friend of Santilli." But when I look, for instance, at the publication listed by Wikipedia Editors, in the Article on Steven Weinberg, it is easy to see that all editors of the journals were his friends and at times his relatives!
Again and again, WHY have Wikipedia editors abused their credibility to discredit a beautiful new discovery of American science?

5. The exploitation of a dead scientist
Nothing seriously supporting Santilli is accepted by Wikipedia Editors. By contrast, anything damaging his reputation is fully listed in the Article no matter how dubious the origin. This is the case of the exploitation by Wikipedia Editors of the scientist Jerdsay V. Kadeisvili from Georgia (former USSR), who died on January 16, 2013. The record from the lawsuit establishes that van Erp contacted Kadeisvili requesting his CV. Kadeisvili responded requesting van Erp's CV. Van Erp did not answer and Kadeisvili terminated all contacts with him.

The biased character of the Wikipedia reporting is seen from the fact that Kadeisvili's scientific CV has always been easily available on the internet and updated until the time of his death J. V. Kadeisvili Works Additionally, Wikipedia Editors have refused for four years to quote Santilli's eulogy also easily available on the internet with link R. M. Santilli Eulogy of J. V. Kadeisvili evidently because its quotation would uncover the editors' intent to damage Santilli in such a clear violation of Wikipedia rules.

6. The Wikipedia, Frank Israel and Pepijn van Erp Affair
Based on the above evidence, as well as evidence emerged from the Lawsuit Pleadings, I must regrettably agree with Santilli that:
     1. Arthur Rubin, David Epstein, and Mark Bernstein, Editors of the Wikipedia Article on R. M. Santilli commissioned their "friend" Frank Israel, Head of the Dutch Skeptic Society to conduct systematic attacks on Santilli's credibility in support of the discreditation contained in their Article.
      2. Frank Israel initiated the requested attacks against Santilli first in Dutch on the website of the Skeptic Society Stitching Skepsis.
      3. Subsequently,Pepijn van Erp, Frank Israel's associate at the Dutch Skeptic Society, initiated his massive defaming campaign against Santilli at the personal, scientific and industrial levels, via slander and defamation on numerous websites, such as:
and in their translations in Dutch, French, German and Italian, and in mirror websites in Italian, French, German and Dutch, the attacks include vulgar and offensive language such as:
"the continuing stupidity...."
"mad professor"
"cunning artist"
"junk scientist "
"pyramid scheme company"
"pseudo scientist"
"fabricating his own awards"
all attacks being without any visible technical content. The Wikipedia commissioning of these vulgar attacks to a senior U. S. scientist with the following achievements and awards (see Biographical Notes, Full Curriculum, and Outline of Works, and the Scientific Awards and Nominations) is confirmed by the fact that van Erp is scientifically illiterate since he never attended any graduate school, besides having a very poor reputation as a person such as Lying and Cheating ofPepijn van Erp and Frank Israel, the additional record Pepijn van Erp Thrown Out of a Chess Tournament for Cheating, and other similar disqualifications. The evidence that Arthur Rubin, David Epstein, and Mark Bernstein commissioned the attacks against Santilli is demonstrated by the fact that to reward Van Erp for all his blog activities against Santilli, they allowed a Wikipedia article about Pepijn van Erp, who is an illiterate, lying and cheating person, with no publications, no independent or notable record, which is against all the notability rules of Wikipedia itself. There are Wikipedia Articles on Pepijn van Erp! How low we Americans have allowed Wikipedia to collapse, no wonder why Wikipedia is losing credibility everyday!

The above negative portraying of the new species of magnecules caused a predictable damage to America and it's image throughout the world. In fact, following such a negative outline in Wikipedia, Santilli was prohibited a presentation of magnehydrogen and its independent experimental verifications at NASA in Florida as well as at the JPL (See the 11-06-2012n letter to Robert Cabana, NASA Director that received a flat rekection). However, one of Santilli's collaborators, A.K. Aringazin from Kazakhstan, is affiliated to the Russian Space Agency which, unlike the American counterpart, is apparently studying the new species of MH due to its enhanced energy output, increased liquefaction temperature and other features important for the space program. In 2016, Santilli was invited by Chinese officers to deliver a plenary lecture on his new fuels with magnecular structure at the World Summit on Environment, held at the Hainan Island, China, see the filming of the lecture SIPS 2016 Plenary Lecture. Santilli's new fuels with magnecular structure are manifestly needed for the increasingly alarming deterioration of our environment. Hence, Wikipedia's disqualification of these new fuels without any technical argument establishes the existence at Wikipedia of serious national problems to be addressed, if we care about our Country.

It seems evident that Santilli's Article has been skillfully written to disqualify the Magnecule "Theory," let alone their existence, even though fuels with magnecular structure are nowadays sold world wide (see website, the U. S. company publicly traded at NASDAQ with the stock symbol MNGA, Magnegas Corporation.) This intentionally negative depiction has caused serious financial damage to thousands of MNGA stockholders, as testified in the sworn Scott Tadsen Affidavit. But the new magnecular bond is at the foundation of the new clean hypercombustion of fossil fuels developed by the second publicly traded U. S. company with stock symbol TNRG, Thunder Energies Corporation of which Santilli is the founder and chief scientist. Hence, Wikipedia Editors have additionally caused serious financial losses to TNRG stockholders, as testified by the second sworn Scott Wainwright Sworn testimonial. The insistent questions emerging stronger and stronger with the deepening of the analysis of Santilli's Article is: WHY? Is this evident hate of Santilli so strong to dwarf evident needs for ethics in the release of scientific information?

7. The Santilli awards that cannot be listed
Another blatant discrimination perpetrated by the Wikipedia Editors is the listing of minute recognition or award to their "friends." They even added a section recording Pepijn van Erp's Voice (how hilarious) but avoid the list of the eleven important awards received by R. Santilli in recognition of his fifty years of dedication to the pursuit of new scientific knowledge despite numerous attempts made by supporters from people all over the world, Santilli's major scientific awards and nominations.

The Editors felt obliged to mention Santilli's 2009 Scientific prize of the Mediterranean Foundation because it is second only to the Nobel Prize, but one of the Editors felt obliged to write in the Talks section of the Article that Santilli had bribed some of his Italian "friends" for that prize. The collapse of ethics at Wikipedia is confirmed by the lack of any indication of the fact that on September 2011 Santilli was knighted with the title of Sir by the Republic of San Marino with the membership in the millenary Equestrian Order of Sant'Agata. In addition, the Wikipedia Editors were immediately informed about the fact that Santilli had been knighted a second time by the President of Italy, Sergio Mattarella, with the membership in the order of "Stella d'Italia" (Star of Italy) despite the defamation and lies promoted by Wikipedia, Frank Israel and Pepijn van Erp in English, Italian, Dutch, German and French languages.

The collapse of ethics by Wikipedia Editors reached its climax with the lack of listing by the Estonian Academy of Science in 1992 (under communist control) of Santilli among the most illustrious applied mathematicians of all times, jointly with illustrious names such as: Karl Friedrik Gauss, William Hamilton, Karl Weierstrass, Arthur Cayley, Sophus Lie, George Frobenius, Henry Poincare', Elie Cartan, Leonard Dickson, Pascual Jordan, Paul Dirac, Adrian Albert, Jay Dynkin, and others (see Scientific Awards and Nominations), for the motivation of such a prestigious listing. It should be reported as another symptomatic element of the collapse of ethics in contemporary science, that, following the above listing, the Estonia Academy of Science received a large number of "complaints" not only because the listing included Santilli, but also because the listing did not include Albert Einstein even though Santilli had developed new mathematics and Einstein had made no discovery in mathematics.

8. The opaque Wikipedia-Google complex
Despite the long list of personal, scientific and corporate insults (identified in Section 5) suffered for years and years, Santilli did not bring a lawsuit. So, I asked myself the question: What did trigger Santilli to sue? To get an answer, I contacted Santilli and this is his answer authorized for release:

"I did sue in Federal Court Frank Israel and Pepijn van Erp, not only because of their river of unprovoked insults, but also because this is the best way to denounce to the American people the fact that the Google-Wikipedia complex constitutes a threat to the survival of our technological civilization in its most vital aspect, which is freedom of pursuing advanced scientific knowledge. More specifically, I sued because the slanderous websites had been permitted to appear year after year immediately following my Wikipedia Article under an internet search for my name, wikipedia-anchor-van-erp.pdf even though the visitors of the slanderous website are much less than the visitors of our scientific and industrial websites. I was told by an internet expert as well as by a specialized investigative agency that the above listing was only possible thanks to an anchor provided to the defaming websites by Wikipedia editors which anchor, in turn, was solely possible following approval by their friends at Google in blatant violation of Google as well as Wikipedia rules. To remain in good conscience as an American Citizen under these assassinations of the very essence of our democracy, I had no other choice than that of suing. Ruggero Maria Santilli, Munich, Germany, June 16, 2018.

9. The unquestionable organized conspiracy against the surpassing of Einstein's theories
Following an in depth, word by word analysis of Wikipedia Article on Sir Prof. Ruggero Maria Santilli (see Biographical Notes, Full Curriculum, Outline of Works, and the Scientific Awards and Nominations); following an in depth study of Santilli's scientific advances; and following information I collected in academia (of course, without disclosing this work), I reached the following conclusions:

      1. There is no doubt that Santilli has been the victim of an organized international conspiracy against his research. Said conspiracy was initiated in the early 1980's by Harvard's physicists Steven Weinberg, Sheldon Glashow, and Sidney Coleman, by the MIT physicist Herman Feshback and other Cantabridgean physicists when Santilli was in the faculty of Harvard University under invited (yes, it is eye witnessed) DOE support, see Santilli's 1984 book with three volumes of documentation Il Grande Grido.

      2. A primary reason for the initiation of the organized conspiracy was to stop the continuation of Santilli's research and DOE funding. All energy releasing processes, as well as most scattering events, are "irreversible over time," as well known, while all 20th century theories, including Einstein special relativity AND quantum mechanics, are strictly reversible, as also well known (because said theories are based on Lie's algebras whose product is invariant under time reversal, e.g., under anti-hermiticity, [A, B] = -[A, B}). Santilli had been invited by the DOE to initiate studies of irreversibility via his Lie-admissible studies he had initiated during his 1965 Ph. D. at the University of Turin, Italy (because theories based on Santilli's Lie-admissible covering product (A, B) = ARB - BSA, R and S > 0, R ≠ S, breaks the anti-hermiticity of Lie's theories by introducing inequivalant directions forward and backward in time, see Santilli's latest account in his Lie-admissible representation of irreversibility Nuovo Cimento B Vol. 121, 443 (2006)). A reason for the organized opposition to the will of the United States Government is that Santilli Lie-admissible theories imply a predictable structural generalization of Einstein special relativity and quantum mechanics whose study was opposed by said Cantabridgean physicists (see Santilli's covering Lie-admissible relativity in section 3 of the work Outline of Works their Lie-isotopic (Section 1) and isodual (Section 4) particularization's and related vast experimental verifications). The above studies were initiated in the fall of 1977 by Santilli under DOE support with contract numbers ER-78-S-02-47420.A00, AS02-78ER04742, DE-ACO2-80ER10651, DE-ACO2-80ER-10651.A001, DE-ACO2-80ER10651.A002 and DE-ACO2-80ER10651.A003. It is unfortunate for America that organized interests on Einstein's theories against the study of irreversible coverings managed to suppress any additional funding since the termination of the last contract in 1983 to such an extent that said studies continued to be prohibited in the U. S. academia (but not abroad!). This is unfortunate because the indicated suppression of funding, with the joint discreditation via slander of opposing pro-America views, implies the possible misuse of billions of research funds released by DOE, NSF, DOD and other Governmental Agencies to support vital research on new energies, scattering events and other irreversible processes via strictly reversible theories, with ensuing blatant insufficiencies particularly in view of mankind's need for new clean energies.

      3. After Santilli left Cambridge, MA, the organized attacks against his research multiplied and actually propagated to the world wide academic community with rather hysterical acts of "scientific gangsterism" one can read in the 2008 update on the organized suppression of scientific democracy in the U.S.A. Since all these organized attacks failed to dissuade Santilli from the continuation of his research, the organized conspiracy intensified with truly unbelievable extremes of unethical conduct, such as the life threats, that can be solely understood under the admission of guaranteed impunity, as well as the admission of very serious problems of scientific ethics in the dispersal of public funds in the U.S.A. for quantitative research. I wonder how did Sir Prof. Prof. Santilli endured so many decades of so vulgar insults (se, e.g.,m Section 6) to such an extreme to let him state: "I felt a leper whenever approaching orthodox academia anywhere in the world."

      4. With the advent of the internet the "torch" of the "organized scientific crimes" against Santilli was embraced by the Wikipedia Editors of Santilli's Article, Arthur Rubin, David Epstein, Mark Bernstein and others. The analysis of Wikipedia Article presented in this Post establishes beyond doubt the continuation of the organized conspiracy against Santilli that was originated by Steven Weinberg, Shelly Glashow, Sidney Coleman, Herman Feshback and other Cantabridgean physicists. Any possible doubt is soon shattered by the fact that Arthur Rubin, David Epstein, Mark Bernstein and other Wikipedia Editors have managed to secure funds from an untold (expectedly governmental) source for the payment of the cost of the ongoing lawsuit in the U. S. Federal Court against Frank Israel and Pepijn van Erp, which cost is estimated to date at about $150,000, by keeping in mind that Pepijn van Erp is unemployed by his own statement and Frank Israel has little salary from a little academic job barely sufficient to pay for shelter and food.

      5. The evidence establishes beyond doubt that Wikipedia Editors Arthur Rubin, David Epstein, Mark Bernstein and others commissioned all personal, scientific and corporate attacks against Santilli since the advent of the internet. Besides a massive violation of Wikipedia rules, said Editors had no technical criticism of Santilli's advances due to lack of the literacy needed to understand post Ph. D. discoveries in mathematics, physics and chemistry. Therefore, they retorted to discrediting Santilli while prohibiting any correction in said Article, to such an extent to render offensive the self-qualification of "Free Encyclopedia." In fact, 1) They commissioned the "fringe" profile by Weimar [1]; 2) They commissioned Calo's criticism [17] of magnecules without any technical content; 3) They commissioned the litany of insults by Frank Israel and his collaborator Pepijn van Erp (Section 6) and others; 4)They requested the organizers of the 2014 international meeting of the American Association of Applied Mathematics in Madrid, Spain, to eliminate technical sessions organized by Santilli and his collaborators, which request caused an international incident that should still be open at the U. S. State Department following strong complaints by the organizers of Santilli's sessions; 5) They requested Robert Brown, then president of the American Institute of Physics to prevent Theodore Simos from accepting Santilli's sessions in his series of international meetings held in Greece on International Conference on Numeric Analysis and Applied Mathematics , which scientific crime was fully achieved via the threat that the AIP would terminate the publication of the proceedings of his meeting in the event Simos would not obey Brown's order; 6) They commissioned Robert Brown to request the organizers of the 2014 Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Aerospace and Sciences held at the University of La Rochelle, France, to remove the AIP from the list of sponsors of the meeting solely in Santilli's award; and other truly incredible misconducts that can only be understood by the admission of very serious problems of scientific ethics and accountability in the United States of America due to the excessively protracted lack of their addressing (for documentation of these and others acts of scientific crimes, one can inspect the public pleadings of the lawsuit, as well as the seven movies of Sworn Depositions by Ruggero and Carla Santilli.

      6. According to internet experts as well as the result of an Investigative Agency, said Wikipedia Editors provided an anchor to the defaming websites by Frank Israel and Pepijn van Erp to let them appear immediately after Santilli's Article under Google search for years and years, Wikipedia-anchor-van-erp.pdf, by noting that the visitors of the slanderous websites have systematically been a fraction of the visitors of Santilli's websites listed below the defaming ones. This type of anchor can solely be operational under the technical support by Google, thus identifying the sinister action by the opaque Wikipedia-Google complex in the suppression of freedom of information that has also been completely ignored by fellow Americans to date. This confirms the teaching by history that "people have the institutions that they either want or deserve."

      7. The universal motivation given by the "minority" of world wide Jewish physicists opposing Santilli's research is that "Santilli is antisemitic." However, the claim of antisemitism proffered for highly technical issues is an insidious form of "antisemitic by Jews" because manifestly damaging the entire Jewish community due to its blatantly unethical intent of discouraging other scientists to consider Santilli's research. The claim of antisemitism is particularly unethical for Santilli because: 1) Santilli's family is on record in the central Apennines to have saved the life of Jews escaping from the nazis, Ruggero being a little child brought food to their shelter amidst nazis shrapnels, whose scars still exist on his body; 2) Santilli has always provided financial support to Jewish colleagues and one can verify from the names of the participants to his meetings throughout decades; 3) Santilli has been a sincere supporter of the State of Israel by first offering his Magnegas technology to help Israel achieve fuel independence, then applying to the defense Threat Reduction Agency for funds to provide Israel means for the detection of smuggled nuclear material, and other offering that can be identified in the formal pleadings or sworn depositions.

The question begging for an answer is: WHY such a massive defaming campaign was organized by so many individuals for such a long period of time against a senior U. S. scientist whose entire scientific production solely contains advanced, post Ph. D. studies? Also, Santilli is a "nuclear physicist" per Wikipedia's own admission. So: WHY Wikipedia solely quotes in Santilli's article his discoveries in "chemistry" and ignores the important discoveries in physics? The list of open questions is almost endless. I regret to report that the answer to these questions cannot be found in Santilli's Article and must be searched for in all other scientific pages in Wikipedia. This raises the view according to which Wikipedia is the darkest shadow in the otherwise beautiful history of American science. May God save American democracy! Wij21go