On: Professor's apparent request to student for fake d...

[rflrob]

If that's the case, why is it in the Supporting Information section? In my most recent paper, I used the SI for results that would be of interest to some people, but do not fundamentally affect the interpretation of the data. In the bad old days before journals were online, having a Supporting Information section wasn't even an option---either it's in the paper, or it's not. If it is crucial to the interpretation of the paper, it ought to be in a major figure/table, and the reviewers ought to have asked for it to be. Otherwise, it's position in the SI indicates to me that it's potentially useful, but not critical.

[refurb → rflrob]

Data is often repeated in the SI section. You put all of your data in the SI and only put select data in the paper.

[AsymetricCom → rflrob]

I understand what you're saying but more fundamental than the supporting data is the trust in the person witting it.