CRG, Barcelona, Spanish/Catalan science: yet another way to carry out research activity (and lies even to the Court)

Update after Catalan Court hearing:
Luis Serrano, CRG Director, lied to the Court

«There is one single problem with spanish, as José Ortega y Gasset explains so well: "no code of honor". No rules, nothing... In other countries also you will find people without code of honor, the vast majority, but there are others that they do have, a percentage. In Spain that percentage is so small that can be considered non existing. No matter the social level, you can't trust them. … Emotionally speaking, are most of them broken. This is why they are impulsive, they call that "hot blood", but the real meaning is lack of emotional intelligence, they are ruled by impulses.» [The Spanish Personality]

Here are the threats of legal persecution I've got from CRG, Barcelona, signed by Managing Director Bruna Vives on behalf of the Centre and Luis Serrano, CRG Director. Look at the Centre for Genomic Regulation at their finest in intimidating and disrespect.
My notes are below the copies (clickable to enlarge).

Spanish version:

1. Here we have a classical actus reus.
2. This threatening from CRG, Barcelona under the claim to keep «professional secrecy» (are these people even sane?) and «confidentiality», i.e. the claim to keep silence about their excellence in research misconduct, followed by these threats where I'm named as «and / or» doing even something «criminal», — look like fit of anger unless just laughable. They are supposed to represent a Spanish intellectual elite, aren't they?
3. Solely this claim to keep their threats confidential (see also the bottom of the pages) should be enough to launch the investigation on the activity of the top employees of CRG, including here-below mentioned favorite of Luis Serrano, CRG Director (ah, all right… she's supposed to be on the top anyway…).
4. NDA (appendix to the work contract) I signed, concerned the contract in force or expired.
   My contract is not expired or in force: it was interrupted (terminated — as they've recognized it themselves in their threat) by CRG, Barcelona due to alleged disobedience to another employee who was not even my immediate superior, the latter was silently dismissed from being such, excluded from the working process and substituted by incompetent, but badly ambitious and passively aggressive Director's favorite, Maria Lluch-Senar, as a «co-leader» of the project with so peculiar correspondence style (how come that such individuals can even get MS and even PhD in Spain? do they colourize their thesis that way too?)
5. I was slandered and mobbed by this M Lluch-Senar, CRG staff scientist (intensively supported by her patron, Luis Serrano, CRG Director in whatever she's been saying about me) several times, she announced me that I'd be dismissed anyway the very next day after she was set as my boss by Luis Serrano.
   Luis Serrano was persistently coercing me, in written too, to talk only alone with his favorite (who by the way is craving for a PI position and her henpecked one is desperate to help her as no one wants her in this.. hum.. another role). I called for CRG's Conflict Resolution Committee (and then they concocted the facts presenting them as if it was them who called for the Committee), — the Committee has completely ignored my complains and followed Luis Serrano's non-negotiable instructions forcing me to recognize scientific authority of his favorite, who persistently lied about my personality, aggressively refusing to get or accept any technical reasoning out of her competence.
   Moreover.
   She was misleading me with data sources and urging me to work with erroneous data concocted by herself.
   I said no.
   I was given «24 hours» to confirm my response.
   I was fired by the end of the same week.
6. CRG was already clearly told off about the neglect of their duty and reputation — they have completely disrespected the words of the conciliation officer, they have even refused to present themselves directly on the hearing.
   They had given no care to their reputation then and now suddenly they have recalled and decided to take care about it, starting with threats, apparently from the bottom of their hearts and their notion of what the (academic) culture is.
   Surely they don't just perform only a bare money laundering using their positions in Spanish science.
   Now they claim that one of their former, thrown out on the streets, employee is damaging their «honour» or «reputation» even «with the intention».
   
   
   Dear CRG, Luis and Bruna,
   • If it's possible for you to put a word «or» between «honour» and «reputation» which you claim you have (after you have lied so dishonourably) — then, obviously, only an upper authority could explain you something about what honour and reputation are: it seems you're still uncertain about these entities. No wonder you have failed to keep them intact.
     You did it on your own.
     No one has forced you to behave like you have.
     Paraphrasing Bertolt Brecht («Vertrauen wird dadurch erschöpft, daß es in Anspruch genommen wird»), your honour and reputation begin to vanish the very moment you claim you have them damaged the way you do it, — especially after you were utterly unable to display at least a minimum respect to your employee, let alone the kind of integrity you have shown as pertinent to you.
     My story is just a shadow on the sand in the background of your behaviour and culture. I'm too small comparing to your own self-exposure.
     «We trust that your knowledge, skills and experience will be among our most valuable assets» — remember the text of your offer? — you gave no respect to any of thus enumerated (by your own) qualities. That's why the only point you could use to attack me with your misconduct was a «discipline».
     Which is ridiculous since you do not have any notion of what it is.
     Not to mention work ethics.
   • I don't damage your «honour or reputation» as you claim «with the intention».
     I speak out, that's it.
   And of course I would only greet an independent open investigation of your professional activity and of its compliance with your own Code of Good Scientific Practice. 
   Even then I doubt that it could depreciate your significance and self-worth acquired with such diligence by your so creative advertising of your excellence, with your passionate appeal for money throughout your much more conspicuous networking, connections, pulls and of course… well… social network accounts. 
   Just don't stop disseminate food & drinks for your subscribers and sponsors as you used to do it: to make sure they would love your excellent science. 
   And, Bruna, seriously… I am so sorry, but having known now the story of your appointment, this your threatening burofax speech looks like a sincere coming out, especially when it's read in Spanish. But of course, of course, it's not how it looks like.

All the corresponding docs on CRG/Barcelona's research misconduct, mobbing and lies are on GitHub or DropBox.
Given the whole story I reckon that the above text is not too harsh and I apologize if someone's sensitive feelings are touched, —
Katerina aka Catherine

Luis Serrano, CRG, forces to talk alone with Maria Lluch Senar and… a certain «indicator, a precursor and a result of» corruption

(yes, that was spooky!)
…whereas what Maria Lluch proposes «does not make any sense» © Luis Serrano, CRG director
(and that was very true)
This is all about scientific institution. This is where your tax money goes to…

How much money, for instance? — see here (H2020) in general,
more exactly: €2,454,522: ERC-2014-ADG grant [1]
So the DB for Mycoplasma project should have been funded from this money…

First, ask yourself: what would you do if a blatant liar aggressively required from you recognition of her scientific authority (whereas it's way far to be even necessary)?
And what if she were fully supported by her patron?

CRG is «an international biomedical research institute of excellence»

CRG mission, vision and values:
«Integrity, ethics and social responsibility»

Oops! Really?? Dictation to process concocted data, coercion to talk only alone (that was felt very awkward) with someone allegedly responsible, but utterly incompetent, work without necessary collaboration, repeated threats, bullying, slandering, repeated lies, and dismissal at the end — was this all included in that «integrity», «ethics» and «social responsibility»?

«Now I did a job. I ain't got nothing but trouble since I did it... not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character. So let me make this abundantly clear» © Firefly

Luis Serrano Pubul: «I think what maria proposed does not make any sense»
A few months later the very same person fired the main addressee of this letter for refusal to recognize the same maria's scientific authority... — interesting, isn't it?

On 06/07/16 18:39, Luis Serrano Pubul wrote:

> Dear Katerina
> Could we meet next week [...]?
> I think what maria proposed to connect directly to the MS raw data or sequencing data does not make any sense.
 
All right. Very true. But wait, what?
Luis Serrano Pubul: «You need to leave the lab if you do not talk with her alone»:

On 15/11/16 10:26, Luis Serrano Pubul wrote:

> Katerina I can try to be there, but remember what we discussed if you cannot work with Maria and you cannot talk with her alone you need to leave the lab end of December. She is your boss for the project.
> Thanks
> Luis
>
> From: Katerina Kirsanоva
> Sent: martes, 15 de noviembre de 2016 10:21 a.m.
> Cc: Luis Serrano Pubul
> Subject: Re:
>
> Dear Luis,
> I wouldn't like to discuss it with Maria tete-a-tete, please.
> I just need the doc file with specification on the formats.
>
> Cheers, -
> Catherine
> El 11/15/16 a las 07:45, Maria Lluch Senar escribió:
>> Hi Katerina
>> We can talk about MS files at 16,30. Is it ok for you?

Of course they perfectly knew that Katerina could talk alone with Maria.
But when you're threatened and coerced to talk alone with someone no matter what is going on and no matter whether your job requires work collaboration — this feels flat out wrong, at very least it makes you just sick. Moreover, if you're already absolutely certain: you cannot give them what they are eager to get from you — and that is not your job and professional skills.

K. was doomed anyway, Luis was playing here as by the time of this his email, several weeks before it, M Lluch-Senar already wrote K. that K. would be fired anyway:

On 28/09/16 14:23, Maria Lluch Senar wrote:
> I have talked with Luis and he said me that he has given you the opportunity to work for three months in the lab and to finish the project.
[NB: K. had 5 years contract signed by Luis Serrano on behalf of CRG, it turned out to be just a sheet of paper. No respect to a person whatsoever, neither to their own legislation]

Maria wrote that (with cc to CRG Director, i.e. Luis Serrano Pubul) the very next day after K. was told that Maria was her boss since then and on: the day before this email, on 27/09/16, Luis told K. in his office that for K. to save her job he gave her 3 months to get along 1) with Maria and 2) with the people in the lab — as at the same time K. was falsely accused that she can work with no one (NB: Katerina had been just moved to the Serrano lab), — i.e.:
if K. gets along with no one then K. is fired.

In reality both these two so nice «warrants» were put away almost immediately.
«There's no honor among thieves» (even «end of December» was a lie… — turned out be the middle of December)
K. had no problems whatsoever with the folks in the labs, that was too obvious, but certainly did not matter: apparently Maria was already promised that after 3 months «the toy» would be discarded.

From Library of the European Parliament, «Conflicts of interest in public administration», 05/02/2013: Isn't it piquant:

Chair of Women In Science/Gender Balance Committee at CRG,
Isabelle Vernos is at the same time…
— Director's (Luis Serrano's) wife & member of the ERC Scientific Council!

Hence the party looks even more languishing: there is a certain «an indicator, a precursor and a result of» corruption.

CRG Director's wife, his miss-stress or other closed to him more than others women-in-science — all of them surely have gotten the unquestionable scientific awards and perks: panels, committees, conference trips, etc — you know how creatively and productively modern scientists spend public money, — having such kind of pull is apparently normal for Spain or Spanish science. But for an outside observer the question remains: what exactly those Women In Science™ were awarded for?
Otherwise, unless it's a corruption. What is that?
Franco style (á la féminin) of management and profiting from science?
Hard to bring up other allusions…

All right, in reality Franco was adhered to the family values otherwise, more traditional way.
This case was an advanced modern version of Spanish neo-franquist modus operandi. Kinda harem way (or alfonsish way.. depending on the perspective.. lol) , surely with the greatest respect to the wives, so worth women with their financial or otherwise depending servants at their also very traditional service. But traditional otherwise. Epitome of women in science and men at women, in their ways to serve. For science, of course. You'd rather dream to join them!

More picante details on the family bounds (see the thread)…

Luis Serrano, CRG director, led by Maria Lluch-Senar: negotiating

The most ridicule thing in the doc below is their «in turn» after the claim for recognition which they were utterly unable to get the decent way. You recognize someone's so shamefully unsatisfied scientific authority and direct supervision (instead of your former boss) and… ta-dam! — «in turn» they allow you to do your job and don't fire you.
NB: scientific authority here is an exclusive right for Maria Lluch to fuck your brain being alone with you and then to lie about you whatever shit she invents — her patron Luis Serrano would support it by any means.
You have to talk alone with her: this is what CRG Director and his favorite repeatedly claimed, whereas having Maria's ambitions together with incompetence in the subject and aggression, there is no other word than «brainfucking» for what she was doing with you tête-à-tête.
Interestingly, «Relocation of Catherine's workplace outside of Serrano's group should be considered» was firstly suggested by the Committee, but then stroke out by those claiming for recognition of the «scientific authority»… Introduced again, but no: «recognize or perish!» — see p. 6 in first version of the Committee below, p. 5 was also rejected: no collaboration, shut up! No witnesses for what we'd force you to do!
And they dragged K. from another lab to their lab what for? To make sure they could do with her whatever they'd like. No way way for relocation, claro.

Juan Valcarcel was contacted by K. in private: she asked him to save her from bullying and she called for Conflict Resolution Committee to protect her from M Lluch Senar's bullying as it was fully supported by CRG Director and looked as a mobbing. Instead J. Valcarcel actually had joined the party: K. was fired for refusal to accept «non-negotiable requirement from Luis, i.e. that Catherine must recognize the scientific authority of Maria» — Catherine had no options than to refuse it since the behaviour of the latter looked as a sheer research misconduct.
James Sharpe (recently appointed Director of the EMBL's outstation in Barcelona) also joined to this mobbing, K. asked him for assistance as well, but on behalf of Luis Serrano he claimed the same from her: K. asked for protection, instead she's been forced to recognise scientific authority of the person she asked to protect her from! — nice, isn't it?
Still… it feels better to believe that at least James sincerely wanted to help. Yet I regret that I trusted him.

The claim of this «scientific recognition» was at very least unnecessary (though ridiculous!) unless yet another sign of the Spanish(?) corruption which at no point K. could accept as appropriate to follow. It's worth to mention that to the meeting on this so called Conflict Resolution Committee, M Lluch Senar came along accompanied by her patron — «because she's his co-leader of the project» (Juan Valcarcel) — so much ridiculous again: rather her professional qualities and culture just could not guarantee the adequate reporting.
Yet K. has been persistently forced to talk only alone with Maria.

This is first (rejected) version of the here-above mentioned document:

— «absence of threats from all parts» is put quite sneaky, as K. never menaced anyone, that was other way round and she just asked for stopping to threaten her (though she had to recognize fascist-style authority of whoever had threatened her).
But we can forgive this Juan Valcarcel as he's been benefiting from ERC grants perhaps á merci of Director's wife…

Luis Serrano, Coordinator of the Systems Biology Programme at the Centre for Genomic Regulation in Barcelona, Spain, and recipient of a €2 million ERC Advanced Investigator Grant for five years, said the requirement of keeping time sheets is at best a waste of time and worst an insult to the high-level researchers. “Time sheets do not make much sense, to be honest. If you want to cheat, you can always cheat,” he said. He said other grants he receives from the Spanish government and the Human Frontier Science Programme do not require time sheets [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2933871/]

— looks like here, Luis, there was that sure case when you were not cheating. You were right about yourself: secured by your position, if you want to cheat, you can always cheat. But what a shame. Your lecherous eyes work not always the way you aim them to.

Corruption prospects this way: Conflict Resolution Committee turned out to be a farce...

performed for Maria Lluch-Senar & Luis Serrano at CRG.
See here who has actually called for the Committee. This yet another example of how academia is corrupt and CRG (Center for Gemonic Regulation) in Barcelona is corrupt in particular.
Then see how they put it in their dismissal notice below, even how they put it in the second edition of the same document. So mean. And such a shame for the prominent lecturer on ethic subjects in science.

First his «co-leader» of the project excludes you from any work collaboration, then slanders that you «can work with no one» and then he completely supports that slander — so nice, isn't it? 

But indeed it was just a part of their freak show:
«A non-negotiable requirement from Luis, i.e. that Catherine must recognize the scientific authority of Maria as co-leader of the project and work under her direct supervision, remains unacceptable for Catherine. Therefore the Conflict Resolution Committee has been unable to find a common ground for understanding between the parts on this key issue and regretfully concludes that a conciliation process is not possible under the current conditions»
(email from the Committee of 13/12/16 10:40, see it in DropBox… keep in mind that initially K. was working in another lab and by the time of this clown commissioners were playing their part she still was under another subordination).
At no point this coercion was really necessary for their MycoSynVac project. Quite on the contrary, looking at its history: it was harmful for it. Indeed it was just a real plot for research misconduct. 

And of course this, along with the fact who actually called for the Committee was not quoted in their dismissal notice.
They dishonorably used this Committee just to make it part of the concocted evidence of insubordination.
Ignored email: really, it was just hopeless

Subject: Re: NCBI's starts/ends...
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 17:39:09 +0100

Dear all,
Please discuss the format in open and constructive manner.
As there is a strict standardization and DB processing rule «Excel is forbidden» (see: here was a pic forwarded later, see below)
the format should be a reasonable amounts of tab-separated text files uploaded one-by-one.
Each of this text files should not exceed 10Mb to be uploaded and processed in a reasonable time.
Each column of each file should be described in detail.
File names should have meaning and described in details otherwise text field in the upload interface should be filled in.
Current processing and analysis is done for 2-spreadsheet Excel files (no more than 10Mb of size) as a trade-off for accurate format description (done by Luis) of a standard files of results coming from a proteomics experiment and my good will to make all my best for the lab.
Processing of Excel files into the DB with analysis on the fly is not a common practice and generally is not accepted due to obstruct capacity to support the standards and analysis as consistent and reasonable prompt.
So CSV only (XML/JSON for those biologists who want die hard is an option too).
However, once the standard is created and described the way it was done by Luis and with the participation/by a professional IT specialist it is still possible to make sure that service is scalable and reliable.
Thanks, —
Catherine

— this is the referenced pic of the outstanding cruelty (actually called the extreme despair), and K. was summoned to the Administrative Director office then, and then of course K. apologized to the only one affected poor kid…
Mean-spirited souls know no humor. They are capable only in mobbing and concocting.

A year later Luis Serrano, CRG director lied even to the Court about who has called for the Conflict Resolution Committee and what for.

María Lluch-Señar & Luis Serrano at CRG, Barcelona: lies, damned lies and dismissal notice

Dismissal notice (the same day got, the same day fired)
Conflict Resolution Committee of the CRG was called by Katerina, not by Maria Lluch-Senar & Luis Serrano, as they so basely imply it in their dismissal notice (see below).
Also in this document they have actually just repeated their slander — see as well in the time line schema: «no one can work with you, you have bad communication with everyone» — this was said to Katerina in September as their reply on her question: why they wanted her to move in the lab if they asserted that she was so bad as a person?

They asserted this shit («no one can work with you») once she had agreed to move in their lab in July: she was told then that they wanted her to move because they needed for her expertise. Would you agree to move in the lab when you're told that you can work with no one? The last trip up was especially nice from them whereas initially M Lluch-Senar had excluded Katerina from any communications with data providers even though it was an utter requirement for the tasks which Katerina had to perform.
So she was working alone and had to figure on her own what were the data sources, and, surely, everything was fine with the other colleagues, no communication problems, just normal lab folks, who have been just helpful and nice. Otherwise, without them, the project could not move at all. But it has moved, please see its timeline: at no point that progress owed to Maria Lluch's activity, which was appallingly destructive.

Also in CRG's dismissal notice they have lied explaining the reason for the dismissal as if it was a repeated insubordination to Maria Lluch-Senar, i.e. to the favorite of Luis Serrano, CRG Director. She was not even an official boss of K., she was only set up as such after already having been set up as a project co-coordinator (exclusively by the authority of her patron). Yet right before Luis Serrano has appointed this M Lluch Senar to be a boss for K. (with no documents, no signatures of course), this Maria Lluch-Senar slandered about K. that K. could work with no one.
And immediately after announcing her slander M Lluch Senar wrote to K. that the latter would be fired anyway. Nice, isn't it?

The truth is that firstly it was repeated harassment, slander and repeated lies.
Maria's misconduct and incompetence, imposed as her «scientific authority» and unaccepted by K. (and the acceptance of that was not her duty at all), K's refusal to give in to data manipulation had that cost: the dismissal.

— it turned out they were too shy to speak English in this disgraceful act, K. had got it only in Spanish.
However later CRG, Barcelona gave a care to translate their threats in English (international scientific institution of excellence) — it seems for them it was really important that K. would have gotten those threats.

Research miscoduct and the dismissal notice, how CRG quotes the sources

Full text of the email they quote in their dismissal notice:

Subject: Re: MS data
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 15:20:49 +0100
Dear Maria,
I am sorry, I cannot comment on this.
I expect you respect your colleagues and able to communicate in a calm and professional manner by email and in person.
I see you do not understand the standardization subject and I am very able to prove it to a professional commission if its needed.
I also clearly see that you are getting passively aggressive and disrespectful, you are trying to undermine me on my professional field which is ridiculous and unacceptable. I think you have to apologize.
So I am sorry, I have nothing to ask you in person.
Regards, —
Catherine

[DropBox archive to the story with the emails exported to PDFs]

— this was reply to Maria's email quoted here-above (where our rock star Women-in-Science© got red font yelling (or blushing)).

(signatures, my & by Bruna Vives Prat, CRG managing director, are dimmed)

Eso es me suena a franquismo!

The actual reason for the dismissal: you «must recognize the scientific authority of Maria as co-leader of the project and work under her direct supervision alone» otherwise you are fired. No one else should witness their research misconduct and data manipulation.

Let alone senseless orders to reformat data export files just to keep you busy («new formatting did not matter, your 1st version was absolutely fine» — a colleague commented while working with that file).

This is how these cool scientists spend public money and do science nowdays.
They send murky messages with messy content, several files of >10Mb sent by email, «new format» © Maria Lluch Senar represented by two >100Mb Excel files with 15 spreadsheets each with hand-made copy-paste — to process all this shit into the DB.
Then they harass a professional who tries to explain how the data should have been processed. And these are just ordinary examples from a routine intellectual work process (paid by public money) of a rock star scientist with «I have many publications» — yet another shining clause of M Lluch-Senar intellectual argumentation.

This rock star scientist which is unable to create on her own a single document (without her patron) or a literate email. The same so gifted person is unable to make a tiny bit effort to grasp one simple thing: what the standards for datafile procession are. Whatever you're trying to explain her, however you try to reach for her mind — «in turn» © this person just harasses you and keeps claiming for recognition of her poor scientific authority.

Remarkably all the harassment supplemented by these wretched claims were fully supported by the top manager of the scientific institution.
Intellectual reasoning? Logical reasoning? Whatever fair damn reasoning?
Come on, bow and scrape and thank Universe, that these so great scientists could not call for the authorized science gestapo to help them out: they have only fired you because you had dared to question the authority of a really cool scientist whose favorite trip up in reply on any reasoning on the subject was just: «If you cannot do this work let us know and we will look for another way to do that».
Which was exceptionally ridiculous for this really cool scientist because «them» had no clue whatsoever about any way how their data could be processed in particular and how the scientific data are usually processed into the DB as that was not their expertise whatsoever. But surely «they» had authority to impose on you any by-products from «their» so beautiful minds.
Because. You. Cannot. Period.
— intellect, culture, work ethic here are so blatantly demonstrated that you just lose the gift of speech…

Why the data analyst has been coerced to work with concocted data and had been denied the direct contact with the data producers?
Why that so damn bright scientist who, as we're sure, is Maria Lluch, — why she was so eager to interfere between the data and a data analyst, why the hell she had to concoct that shameful hand made copy-paste Excel spreadsheets (tens megabytes), which she was unable/unwilling to put in a group repository and thus sent it by email, instead of allowing the professional to work with the data sources directly?
MS data were already processed into the DB according to the format, suggested by the project leader, Luis Serrano, Director of CRG — why this very format was refuted by his favourite and why Luis Serrano, Director of CRG had to obey M Lluch-Senar and why did he let her make dirty manipulations with data?
Why on the Earth she's been so craving for that bow and scrape?
How the hell do they spend public money then? — they hire a professional, then perform their mobbing actions against her attacking her purely on personal ground, gaslighting and slandering about her relations with other colleagues with nonsense allegations (because there is no other way to attack her) for several months and at the end just fire her after more than 9 months without giving her any credit for the job she's been doing for them.
Is it a Franquist style of modernized Spanish science or what??
And at the and — why the Staff Scientist Maria Lluch Senar and the CRG Director Luis Serrano Pubul had to lie so shamelessly?
These are fairly good questions.
And finally, how come the path of the apparent scientific misconduct was the easiest choice for them?…

picture is taken from this article on scientific misconduct: Scientific misconduct & its effect on the medical literature
(as much as it affects biomed sciences)

Here is my twitter account: @JWapatoo where I post current updates on this case and my relaxed attitude, i.e. after me being put under pressure and stress, it is naturally personalized unlike expressed as such while I am on duty where I'm restrained by professional standing rules and contract clauses.

«You should be stressed as you are still in initial closely watched period»
© Julia Ponomarenko
(4 months after start of the contract… + «you have to satisfy Luis» — publicly, several times, in the same context: «do you care too much what people say about you?» — nice vibrant and so motivating working atmosphere, isn't it?)

So these people don't even give a damn about the fact that a professional engineer, doing brainwork, can be only either productive or stressed.
Never both. Obviously, if quality results are to be provided.
Or, there is no need for data integrity in all this so playful scientific ambiance?
Or, these scientists — do they use their own brain for professional purposes? 

P.S. CRG, represented by its Director Luis Serrano and PI Juan Valcarcel, do support scientific fraud of their PI MP Cosma — please see by these links an article of Leonid Schneider and PubPeer comments.

 

They do their best to follow the fashion:

 

 

— see the press release on CRG web-site about yet another biotech company Pulmobiotics to hack your health under the selling moto «we're saving lives» or/and yet another money laundry by Barcelona based InVivo Capital's operations.

CRG, Barcelona — recollection of phrases I wanted to say but did not dare…

…thought it'd be too funny/indiscreet and could make things worse: 

[Please read also how Luis Serrano, CRG's director lied to the Court]

— OK, Luis, she says nobody can work with me (the slander they both insisted in), but there is a certain proof that I can work at least with you! then why did your favorite turn out to be so furious by the results of this work? %)

— Luis, please calm down, I am not recording this conversation %)

— Maria, what exactly is going to happen when we are alone? >%[
Of course there were no problem for me to come up to her and that happened on many occasions. I just could not get why I had to be coerced to talk alone with her even when I asked for help while she'd been getting dumb blind or dumb unable to get a point.

Update after 31/01/18:
On the Court hearing Luis Serrano, CRG director, lied that I constantly refused to talk to her.
I never refused when it could have any sense. I just asked for help!.
I never refused any direct request for meeting, at most I felt annoyed by her dull «if you wish we can talk» — only in that cases I could openly respond: I don't.

— Luis, what exactly is Maria going to do with me being so necessarily alone with her? >%[

(no way that was really necessary and it was felt so freaking creepy!)

— James, what kind of science exactly people do here that this «closest to Luis person» claims to recognize her scientific authority? and you too, why do you have to coerce me to this scientific authority recognition on behalf of Luis Serrano? %-O

— All right I can recognize this scientific authority. But can I use a sound recording device to keep all fascinating quotes of such authority for posterity and then to display them for public appreciation and future generations? %P

Only in that case that'd make sense, I wouldn't mind to suffer for the sake of science!
I'd promise to skip details when this authority kindly enlightens ignorant-me about the differences between coding and non-coding RNAs…
Thank God Maria didn't start with teaching me how to count to 10, only to 15 — «I have fifty publications, I will teach you! — fifty or fifteen?… — well, fifteen»
But once I did take notes after her speech as I just felt uneasy — she claimed I'd tore out the sheets (I did) and handed them to her (I didn't). Creepy! %-|

— Let's send her hand-made Excel file to the group-list, it'd be fun!! :D

(where M Lluch Senar had been unable to calculate correctly mapping coverage between TSS & TTS in MS Excel and was trying to make me use it as a primary data source for the DB)

— It'd be good to have this email published, shall I forward it to…

(where a colleague writes me, after having advised me to simulate a depression^*): «ask for an external, independent psychological evaluation of you two (then it will be clear she has a psychopathy»)
I felt so touched by their so considerate intrigue (underlining above is mine), which was not a big deal to unfold though.
Yet disgusting.
Director's chihuahua surely happened to be not the only one little psychopath: he had a look very much the same in so many ways (for instance, shouting on me in his office just for bringing up an email citation from my official boss) :-|
And the person who urged me to simulate depression, stopped talking to me once I refused to follow her so solicitous directions, — isn't that charming, uh?

— Why can't I work with an another colleague for the same project? — I would be happy to recognize her scientific authority!

Unfortunately this question was too rhetorical (a colleague was surely professional, way more smart and educated than M Lluch Senar, but obviously I had been coerced to recognize only one very particular «scientific» authority», with silent support by that demonstratively totally cowed colleague, so no way it could have been carried out)…
«she has destroyed my career, she will destroy yours!» — Hedgehog is scared by a naked ass! :]
Not exactly everyone is giving in to anything.
Moreover, that self-humiliation of the career race victim was rather a game in pathetic submission under highly positioned henpecked's requirement than really a true and irreparable loss.

---

*) I could do it to save my position at CRG: Spanish law in that case would assess the dismissal as invalidated, yet legitimizing employer's inclination to humiliate an employee and make slanderous statements about her qualities which was a favourite MO of Maria Lluch-Senar and Luis Serrano's so creative and productive tandem.

And of course I didn't say that… —