The document discusses apparent academic fraud in the final report of an EPSRC-funded research project at the University of Nottingham. Several papers listed as results of the project predate the actual dates of the project, and some publications have authors from Spanish institutions rather than UK ones. When these irregularities were reported to EPSRC, they merely asked the university if there were any issues rather than investigating further. This indicates that funding bodies are unwilling to properly scrutinize or act on cases of academic fraud.

1. Let‘s talk about how EPSRC allows Universities in the UK to commit fraud in the final report of research funded by said EPSRC (The Engineering and Physical Science Research Council) ACADEMIC FRAUD UK www.talenco.info

2. Let‘s have a look at the final report of an EPSRC grant awarded to the University of Nottingham www.talenco.info

3. Here it is, pay attention to the start and end dates

4. This is an abstract about the publications resulting from the research...

5. Have a look at the paper encircled in red

6. Now, if the paper was received by the publisher in June 2001....

7. And the project started in September 2001....

8. The paper cannot be a result from the project, can it?

9. The paper cannot be a result from the project, can it? Let‘s carry on......

10. The paper cannot be a result from the project, can it? Let‘s carry on...... There were many papers published as a result of the research.... Seven papers in refereed publications....

11. From the final report on Project EPSRC GR/R/44393/01

12. From the final report on Project EPSRC GR/R/44393/01 (Pst! By the way: EPSRC may not have a copy anymore, but I do.... if you are interested)

13. From the final report on Project EPSRC GR/R/44393/01 Impressive! Seven papers within the three years of the grant! But actually the journal titles ring a bell to me......Separation Science & Technology... Hmmmmm.....

14. Let us see... Separation Science and Technology.....Here it is... Strange! Not UK?

15. wait a moment! 2000???

16. Even worse! It was received in August 1999, and it was the second of two papers in this journal, the previous one published in 1999!

17. Incidentally, please remember this paper in Langmuir

18. Ah, well, what next? Let‘s go for Colloid and Polymer Science...

19. Again boring, boring, boring, same old story (well, for me)...October 1999 went BEFORE September 2001, didn‘t it? I am a bit embarrased ...NOT! pointing out the authors were (*sigh*) again based in Spain, and not UK.....

20. Let‘s go for the next one...

21. I could be nice and point out that this one, was published in 2001, but the problem is that it was accepted in 2000 Can‘t be bothered to say anything about that anymore

22. Good, isn‘t it? From 10 papers we already have 5 which predate the project, of which 4 were published by Spanish scientists based in Spain....and we only have looked into 5! Let us skip Langmuir, if you are curious contact me at www.talenco.info. It‘s the same old story

23. Let us head back to the initial list of publications.....

24. Let us head back to the initial list of publications..... This is a piece of plagiarism which deserved its own YouTube video „plagiarism at University of Nottingham“: search there for nacho2002b to find it

25. Let us head back to the initial list of publications..... This paper actually never existed...but there is another wonderful video on Youtube by yours truly nacho2002b about it... I know, sounds strange, but trust me, it‘s great fun!

26. The best part of the story is that when EPSRC (the Engineering and Physical Research Council of the UK) was told that the final report to the grant (obtained from themselves through the FoI Act) contained such irregularities, they reacted by asking the University of Nottingham..... www.talenco.info

27. The best part of the story is that when EPSRC (the Engineering and Physical Research Council of the UK) was told that the final report to the grant (obtained from themselves through the FoI Act) contained such irregularities, they reacted by asking the University of Nottingham..... Wait for it, wait for it..... www.talenco.info

28. The best part of the story is that when EPSRC (the Engineering and Physical Research Council of the UK) was told that the final report to the grant (obtained from themselves through the FoI Act) contained such irregularities, they reacted by asking the University of Nottingham..... Wait for it, wait for it..... If they thought there was anything irregular!! www.talenco.info

29. The best part of the story is that when EPSRC (the Engineering and Physical Research Council of the UK) was told that the final report to the grant (obtained from themselves through the FoI Act) contained such irregularities, they reacted by asking the University of Nottingham..... NOT how on Earth had that happened.... www.talenco.info

30. The best part of the story is that when EPSRC (the Engineering and Physical Research Council of the UK) was told that the final report to the grant (obtained from themselves through the FoI Act) contained such irregularities, they reacted by asking the University of Nottingham..... OR whose head was going to roll.... www.talenco.info

31. The best part of the story is that when EPSRC (the Engineering and Physical Research Council of the UK) was told that the final report to the grant (obtained from themselves through the FoI Act) contained such irregularities, they reacted by asking the University of Nottingham..... Just if they thought there was anything irregular!! www.talenco.info

32. You will not be surprised at that point in the story to learn that the University of Nottingham saw nothing wrong in the preparation of the final report...... www.talenco.info

33. You will not be surprised at that point in the story to learn that the University of Nottingham saw nothing wrong in the preparation of the final report...... However, the moral of the story is actually quite interesting.... www.talenco.info

34. What would happen if ..... www.talenco.info

35. A proposal was prepared by academics at a British University in combination with a foreign scientist... www.talenco.info

36. A grant application was prepared by academics at a British University in combination with a foreign scientist... They split the wages budgeted in the grant for the foreign scientist.... www.talenco.info

37. A grant application was prepared by academics at a British University in combination with a foreign scientist... They split the wages budgeted in the grant for the foreign scientist.... They had agreed to pass work done and published abroad as the results of the project... www.talenco.info

38. You would never hear about it www.talenco.info

39. You would never hear about it Because your funding bodies would never react if they found out... www.talenco.info

40. You would never hear about it Because your funding bodies would never react if they found out... NEVER EVER www.talenco.info

41. EPSRC IS CURRENTLY FUNDING 5,825 GRANTS www.talenco.info

42. EPSRC IS CURRENTLY FUNDING 5,825 GRANTS www.talenco.info

43. EPSRC IS CURRENTLY FUNDING 5,825 GRANTS WITH ALMOST www.talenco.info

44. EPSRC IS CURRENTLY FUNDING 5,825 GRANTS WITH ALMOST 3.6 BILLION POUNDS www.talenco.info

45. IT‘S YOUR MONEY www.talenco.info

46. ER, NO... www.talenco.info

47. WAS YOUR MONEY www.talenco.info