Reading the material proof and Harvard's reaction, the "accused of" is merely journalistic caution for a red-handed case. > Also, who cares if they did lie Th

Reading the material proof and Harvard's reaction, the "accused of" is merely journalistic caution for a red-handed case. > Also, who cares if they did lie They didn't just lie, they tampered with collected data used for scientific research, harming their co-authors' work and reputation and giving fake leads to their field of study, thus wasting their peers' time spent on reproducing the case. It may also have had an effect on promotions that their peers should have gotten and on the way people got managed, based on these behavioral studies. Also the evidence collection displayed in another reply is technically interesting.