>> building a better bay area. moving forward. finding solutions. this is abc7 news. ♪ i'm kristen sze. you are watching "getting answers" on abc7. every day, we talk with experts about issues important to the bay area and we get answers for you in real time.

today, as temperature records continue to fall around the world today, how much longer can the heatwave that millions of americans are under last? and how can we adapt to this? we will talk to a leading claimant health scientists. the powerball jackpot tonight is a whopping $1 billion. but as a fever strikes, is there actually a way to increase your chances of winning? we will go is the founder of a lottery platform. first, something extraordinary happened today that's shaken the bay area, silicon valley, and the entire world of science and education. the president of stanford, the university that ranks consistently in the top three in the world, resigned. he has led stanford for seven years. he sent out a letter announcing his departure at the end of next month. it comes after months of explosive reporting digging into acquisitions at the president of the university supervised

falsified research and allowed it to be published. joining us live now investigations editor of the student newspaper the stanford daily, seo baker -- theo baker. thanks so much for joining us. i'm sure it's a really busy day for you today, the resignation captures a stunning set of events that you put into motion last november when, you wrote the first article about potential missteps and the work done by his lab before he came to stanford. what were those allegations? >> there were whisperings of something regarding alleged or manipulated research published, that were floating around the internet for years, hiding in scientific forums and blog posts, but they had never been reported. he assumed the post of stanford's president where he directs an institution of more

than $8.9 billion of funding. so these allegations revolved around the edge that images that were published in his papers had been manipulated and photoshopped to show results that they did not actually represent. kristen: in that first november article, i think you published that image which you guys looked at had forensic scientists work with you on that. we will go ahead and pull that up. this is too much further laymen and myself to understand. but bottom line, i think you were able to glean from talking to scientists is that this data was not correct when it was submitted to publications, and somebody at the top of the lab should've noticed, is that what they saide from a story that's been progressing over the months, there are a lot of different allegations that have come out of the woodwork at this point. the original story focused on a number of different errors like the one that you can see on your screen here.

that is what forensic images since a type one duplication. replicated and put into another space. some of the many relations are a lot more tricky to spot. little bits and pieces are spliced together. there are about a dozen papers where he has a name to co-author and seems to have manipulated imagery. for five of those the principal author. he's now agreed to step retractor issue corrections to these widely cited papers and that is something that definitely wouldn't have happened had are reporting not brought this into the fore and stanford decided to investigate itself. kristen: i want to ask you what stanford's reaction was initially. you've published dozens of articles on the subject. and it sounds like there was some prodding before they put

together this board toinof lead the investigation and then eventually hire an outside fir all of those things were not a given from the start, right? >> none of this was one thing that we still remain shocked at is that the university did open an investigation within a day. which was rather remarkable. that's not something stanford has a real history of doing. and that investigation o was a sort of fraught with its own issues. we revealed one of the people they appointed to invelliostat t into the company. so they hired a lawyer to do the review instead. i -- recent reporting suggests they may not have access to certain sources because they may not guarantee them anonymity. that in and of itself has been a big part of the story. stanford's reaction to this and how they have decided to dig into the research of the top person at one of america's most

premier research institutions. kristen: finally, they their findings two days ago, what was the ultimate conclusion? >> the report just came out publicly this morning. it was somewhat remarkable for us to read. it concluded he had incubated a culture across to decades and three different institutions where he rewarded the winners and punished the losers and that resulted in a number of manipulated research data to be published in his name. the report did not conclude he directly manipulated things. but it did conclude that for two decades, he failed to correct the scientific record despite being made aware of allegations a number of different times. and that was really remarkable to read especially in a report that was sanctioned and sponsored by stanford's own board of trustees. kristen: type in a little bit more deeply into that conclusion of rewarding the winners, those

who produce positive results if you will, marginalizing the losers. do you think that culture is bigger than one man? >> without a doubt. that's actually -- if we a talking about the story as something that can be taken to mean things that are greater than any one individual man, i really hope this is a big part of that conversation. scientific integrity, who takes response ability for errors, who was pushing people -- is pushing people or not necessarily providing the safeguards to prevent something like this happening. there are a lot of senior researchers in science who did it research or did not have much to do with it and they take credit for it when it is convenient for them, and if errors arise, sometimes they try to disclaim those. i hope this can open up a much broader conversation about who takes responsibility, when things like this happen in science. unfortunately, we've seen a few instances of that this summer. princess kate gino at harvard --

francesca gino at harvard coming out in a similar time. scientific integrity is more seriously now. that's an important thing to keep in mind. kristen: we want to show part of the letter today that he sent to the stanford community. he says the panel did not find that i engaged in research misconduct regarding the 12 papers reviewed, nor did i find i had knowledge of or was reckless regarding research misconduct in my lab. the report identifies areas where i should've done better and i will accept the report's conclusions, mirroring that may be closer supervision should have been warranted. during all this time, i'm sure you want to him multiple times, did he ever talk to you? >> no, never. that has been consistently something that has been a frustration for me because obviously my primary concern for all of this has been trying to put together the most complete

picture that i can. when his side of the story is one that he chooses not to tell us or he chooses not to answer questions about, it makes it even harder to understand or report his perspective. he has dodged a number of questions and it is fair to say his narrative throughout has changed dramatically. , at first it was his defense that he reiterated multiple times that the alleged minute relation in his papers had no bearing on the findings of the studies. obviously since now, have been retracted. that is not true. a number of things that have been somewhat walked back. for example, he said the data were reproducible, about one of these papers that is in question, and actually the company where he worked confirmed that he knew even before it was published that a data were not reproducible. even the stanford report hits and publicly about that same paper that it is totally

inappropriate to retract or corrected. and the report issued says no, it should be retracted or corrected with a lengthy correction. kristen: you said these rumors have been swirling for many years. was this something stanford had known about during the time of their hiring process, to find the next president before he was hired? did they hire him knowing this was out there? >> this is not the sort of thing of any committee is normally looking at. as far as we know, he has never killed anyone or sexually assaulted someone or ebay to texas which is sort of the things that you are most obviously looking for when you're betting someone for an executive position. research misconduct is something that is often and shrouded in mystery. it's a conversation that really needs to be brought to the fore more. i think there's a lot that people who were in my position a year ago would not necessarily have context to understand.

my understanding is that i do not believe that a number of these issues had been raised with stanford at the time -- despite the fact that several of them were raised publicly. kristen: i wonder what kind of reactions, messages you might be getting from your stanford friends or professors, the rest of the stanford community today. >> i'm exceedingly only reason i'm able to do this is because i've had people who are willing to stand behind me. i've had a fantastic team at the stanford daily, the independent student newspaper. i've also been so lucky that a community of professional journalists have stayed behind us and supported us. we were the first student organization ever to be given an award and that absolutely blew all of our minds, the idea that people have been willing to go out on a limb and stand behind us, when we were in a vneble position during this repting,

reporting on a guy who ultimately has control over all of us. so the fact that we've had people standing by us the whole time, or now also -- who are now also recognizing that a lot of our reporting has been verified by stanford's own committee, it really means the world to me and to our entire team. kristen: you mentioned the journalism award, i just want folks to know, our viewers may not know this if they are not in the business, that is a very prestigious award, and at 18, you are the youngest ever to get that honor. i don't know if this is all -- has all sunken and or what your plans are for the future, but are you going to journalism? >> i think i have to pick a major first. kristen: you don't have a major. [laughter] >> i don't. i've been i guess a little distracted. but it has been sort of quite a strange year. a year ago, i had not stepped foot in a stanford classroom ever. i had yet to pick my first

classes, yet to learn where i was going to live in a dorm. certainly had yet to come across a number of the scientific things that i would end up investigating. so to be in this position a year later is utterly strange. for the most part, i think it is a good thing. i feel really pleased we are able to contribute to the scientific record being able to correct itself in these five very widely read and influential papers. i do feel confident in saying that those papers would not have been retracted or corrected without our reporting. to be able to contribute to the scientific record especially as someone like me who is not a neuroscientist, and does not often have opportunities to contribute to science as a whole, it really means a lot. kristen: theo baker, we can't wait to see what you will report on next. thank you so much for joining us.

coming up about record-setting heat from coast-to-coast. and that's not just here in the u.s., with temperatures soaring around the globe, what's driving it, how can we adapt, and what changes need to be made?

kristen: a historic heatwave is gripping the globe. the star and conditions right now. north america, europe, and asia. we've been telling out the triple digit hea across the countrtering previous records and now the u.s.al envoy for climate change is calling the situationa that to all hum." you can see why looking at those temperatures. 117 degrees in phoenix today,

las vegas, 109. joining us to discuss the dangers of climate change is a professor of global health and environmental and occupational health and sciences at the university of washington. thanks for your time. >> thanks for covering this important issue. kristen: we can't not cover it. it is all around us. we will pull that map back up so people can see what we are talking ab that is just the u.s.. phoenix, 20 days ofng records. can we talk about -- ink me is 108 degrees again. i think in china, the deserts hit 120 something. s happening? why are extreme events happening all at once? >> that's a really good question. we will know the exact answer to that in retrospect. we juno climate change is increasing the intensity,

duration of heat waves. worldwide there's been very extreme events similar to what we are seeing right now. we also know that we are in an el niño, which does tend to bring higher temperatures. el niño's part of natural climate variability. it is somewhat yes, climate change is increasing the heat worldwide. kristen: people taking photos -- i guess they want to mark that it's a special event. i don't know how they can stand out there. can humans actually be in temperatures that hot without very quickly with a ring under the effects? >> it depends on how healthy you are and your underlying medical conditions. people can briefly if they are normally healthy spend a brief timeout in very high heat as

long as they ensure that they drink enough water and they find a way to cool down after that exposure. there are people who have got chronic underlying medical conditions, where it will be much more challenging to do that. kristen: given that it is a health risk for a lot of people, there are associated costs with that, obviously there are pressing concerns to find solutions. the fact that you are seeing it as a global experience right now, does that offer some hope that there may be global action and coordination? because everyone is suffering? >> there's quite a bit of global action on developing heatwave early warning and response systems. we've got quite a number of them in the u.s. including in phoenix. there's many more worldwide. there's a global heat health information network that's helping coordinate these systems around the world. so we can take the lessons learned and best practices when we build new ones. in the longer term, we need

mitigation plans and ways to bring down greenhouse gas emissions so we don't face an even hotter future than what we are facing right now. kristen: of course, the un envoy for the u.s., talking about the climate in china right now. are you hopeful the two countries will produce some sort of results that will allow for some sort of cooperation as two leading nations to tackle this problem? >> the u.s. and china have cooperated in the past. i am very hopeful they will be effective in finding other ways to collaborate going forward, so they can start bringing greenhouse gas emissions down and learn from each other in terms of our early warning systems. kristen: in the meantime, while we wait for the nation states or the states to take largest collection, what can individuals do right now to help us adapt? >> individuals need to be more

aware than they are now that he is a health risk -- heat is a health risk. people that die from the heat don't need to die from the heat. we need to take care of ourselves and look after our family, friends and colleagues, making sure people are not getting into trouble with the heat. and if they are, they start taking action and drink enough water, they find a way to cool themselves down. and make sure we keep everybody safe during these very hot temperatures. kristen: thank you so much for your time. you know the somebody's got to win, might as well be you. a lotto next with tips

introducing togo's new french dip sandwiches featuring fresh artisan bread piled high with tender roast beef, smothered with melty provolone cheese and served with hot au jus for dipping. try the roast beef or pastrami french dips today only at togo's kristen: tonight's powerball

drawing has soared above $1 billion. tomorrow night, there's another $720 million on the line with mega millions. if you are feeling lucky, you might want to run out and buy a ticket. but are there ways to actually increase your odds? joining us live now to answer that question and more is the founder of lotto edge.com. thanks for coming on the show. >> thanks for having me. kristen: what are the odds any way that one single ticket could win the powerball or megamillions? >> on powerball, the odds of winning are going to be one in 292 million. on the mega millions, it is slightly higher with one in 302 million. kristen: those sound daunting. given that, are you seeing a lot of people buying, even though they know we hardly have a chance at all? >> we were actually just looking at this earlier today as well. you really start to see a lot of

people coming off the sidelines and playing for these jackpots. when they tip at 500 $1 we see the uptick there. the next big uptick is at one -- at the $1 billion mark. seeing a lot of ticket sales and people coming out of the woodwork to play this time. kristen: everybody's like, well, what can i do to improve my odds? is there any historical data or anything you have seen that could boost your chances just a little bit? >> so, you know, with drawing games, they are different than scratch offs. a past drawing has no bearing on a future draw. whereas, with scratch offs, you can look at historical sales, it is a preprinted number of tickets, you can track when a ticket might be due to hit. i will say, we did look 16 years worth of data before and a couple things popped out

at us. a good thing to avoid doing is always sticking with calendar dates. like anniversaries and birthdays like that. it limits the numbers you are playing. 3% of the time, all the numbers will fall within a calendar date. we also found which was kind of interesting a kind of significant amount of the time we found the perfect mix is about three even and to -- even and throughout. a good balance of even and odd numbers. that kind of makes sense. what about the powerball? any hints on powerball? >> is going to be the same there . trying to mix those up. that analysis we did was on both powerball and megamillions.

use the entire play slip. don't play patterns. if you have lucky numbers, mix them in. anything historical that people try to look at, typically that's going to have no bearing on the future draws. kristen: to the machine drawn tickets have just as good of a chance? >> they do. whether you pick your own numbers, a mix of lucky numbers or stuff or let the machine pick it, you have an equal chance of hitting the jackpot. kristen: of course the jackpot sounds huge but once you take over the taxes and you do the lump sum, it's usually what? >> the lump sum going to chop off about half of that and on top of that paying taxes, so a billion dollars sounds amazing, i don't think anyone is going to complain with $300 million or so at the end of the day, but it is a pretty big haircut you are going to take. kristen: i wouldn't complain. but you are right. thank you so much for your insights. a remin

newscast, breaking news, weather and more with ou

kristen: thank you so much for joining us today for "getting answers." we will be here every weekday at 3:00 p.m. answering questions with experts from around the bay area. "world news tonight" with david muir is next. see you back here at 4:00. tonight, the images coming in now. the monster tornado touches down, an ef-2. winds up to 135 miles per hour. fueled in part by this deadly and dangerous heat. and the passengers on board a delta flight sitting for more than an hour on the tarmac amid