In the most recent hearing, held last month, Rep. John Dingell (DMich.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, asked several people to describe how their institutions handled—or mishandled—the allegations brought by O'Toole.
What follows are excerpts from the testimonies of key figures in the dispute. The comments are not intended to prove or disprove specific allegations, nor are they meant to provide any kind of overview of this one case. Rather, they are reprinted here to provide a glimpse into how scientists at the center of such a dispute do their jobs, how they see themselves, and how they are viewed by others; as well as to illuminate some personal elements of a bitter and protracted debate.]
So what is the case against us? That there are legitimate disagreements over the results of our work? This I recognize and encourage. That ...
