Appearing in this network is not an accusation. Most of the scientists below attended a dinner, took a call, or accepted funding for legitimate research — and did nothing wrong. Several have said they regret the association. A line on a graph is a documented connection, not a finding. Where someone has been sanctioned, resigned, or has questions to answer, this page says so specifically. Where they do not, it says that too — see Section 05.
The correction this hub makes. Coverage of Epstein and science has concentrated almost entirely on MIT, because MIT commissioned a public report and a director resigned.
MIT received roughly $800,000. Harvard’s Program for Evolutionary Dynamics received around $6.5 million — eight times as much, with no comparable public accounting.
And the money is not the network. The network is the introductions, and those ran through one man.
The structure, in three layers.
The broker — Brockman, Edge, the dinners, TED. Not a scientist; the person who could get scientists in a room.
The institutions — MIT, Harvard, Arizona State, the Santa Fe Institute. Each supplied a name Epstein could carry elsewhere.
The fields — evolutionary dynamics, genetics, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, digital currency. And, running underneath, the two subjects he actually cared about: eugenics and transhumanism.
What he was buying. Not research direction. Almost none of the money was large enough to steer anything. He was buying the right to be described as a science philanthropist — and then spending that description in Harare, Kigali, Beijing and the Gulf.
Per Brockman’s own annual tax filings, the literary dinners held during the TED Conference were for years after Epstein’s conviction almost entirely funded by Epstein.
Axios put it plainly: the Edge Foundation “now appears to have been funded largely by and for the benefit of Jeffrey Epstein.”
A registered sex offender was paying for the room in which the scientific elite met each other — and the person taking the money kept making introductions.
Section 01
The Network
Hover or tap any node for what the files document. Filter by layer.
Reading the graph. Lines are documented connections — funding, introductions, employment or membership. They are not allegations. The two gold nodes on the right, Eugenics and Transhumanism, connect directly to Epstein rather than to any institution — because they were his stated personal interests, not anyone’s research programme.
Section 02
The Broker
John Brockman is not a scientist. He is a literary agent whose client list included Marvin Minsky, Joi Ito, Steven Pinker, Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins and Lisa Randall.
What Edge was. Founded in 1988, an invitation-only intellectual salon that became, in its own description, one of the most influential venues in science writing — publishing annual books, convening symposia, and running the billionaires’ dinners during TED from 1999.
What Epstein got from it. Brockman made the first introductions between Epstein and multiple scientists, including Seth Lloyd and Lisa Randall. Steven Pinker has said Brockman talked him onto Epstein’s plane.
What Brockman got. Funding. Per his own tax filings, the TED dinners were for years after the conviction almost entirely paid for by Epstein.
The email that shows the transaction. Brockman complained to Epstein that “the usual billionaire crowd is not showing up,” asked him to help promote the salon, and — in a subsequent message — asked Epstein to send his private plane to collect New York Times columnist David Brooks, explaining how important it was to cultivate him into “Edge’s biggest fan and booster.”
The 2002 photograph. An Edge.org image shows Brockman, Pinker, Dennett, Katinka Matson and Dawkins en route to TED. An earlier caption, since altered, stated they were travelling with Epstein.
Brockman has not been charged with any offence. Nothing establishes that he knew of the trafficking.
This site documents the intermediary function repeatedly — someone trusted by the target, financially tied to Epstein, who carries the proposal so it arrives under their name.
Kyiv — the mother agency.
Abidjan — Nina Keita.
Cambridge — Joi Ito.
Seattle — Boris Nikolic.
New York — John Brockman, for the entire scientific establishment.
One Method · the intermediary →
Section 03
The Institutions
The largest concentration of Epstein’s academic money anywhere — more than two-thirds of his Harvard giving, run by mathematical biologist Martin Nowak. Geneticist George Church also received funding, later attributing his failure to refuse it to “nerd tunnel vision.”
$7.5M recorded as “anonymous.” Epstein was on MIT’s “disqualified” donor list and the director went around it, proposing to route gifts through another foundation.
Largely funded by Epstein and, through Epstein, by Leon Black. Krauss sought Epstein’s advice on handling his own sexual-misconduct allegations, and agreed to retire in 2018 facing dismissal.
Epstein’s earliest documented scientific links, formed through donations. Co-founded by Nobel physicist Murray Gell-Mann.
The entry point, roughly fifteen years before the conviction.
Brockman’s literary dinners were held during the TED Conference, and attendees were frequently TED speakers. TED itself is not documented as receiving Epstein money.
The room, not a recipient.
The January 2026 release triggered reviews and controversies across multiple additional universities.
Section 04
What He Wanted From It
Two answers, and they operate at different levels.
The instrumental answer: a description
None of the money was large enough to steer a research programme. MIT’s $800,000 sat against $1.8 billion in annual research funding.
What it bought was the right to be called a science philanthropist — which he then spent on a currency proposal for Mugabe’s Zimbabwe, routed through a university lab, and on introductions to heads of state who would not otherwise have taken his call.
MIT’s own faculty put it exactly: “we allowed MIT to contribute to the elevation of his reputation.”
The substantive answer: eugenics and transhumanism
This is the part that is not instrumental. He appears to have genuinely believed it.
Reporting establishes that he told associates he wanted to seed the human race with his own DNA, and that he discussed eugenics with scientific friends until shortly before his death.
He is reported to have told at least one associate that he hoped to have his brain and penis frozen at death, for revival.
Why the field selection makes sense in that light. Evolutionary dynamics, genetics, artificial intelligence, life extension — the portfolio is not random. It is the portfolio of someone interested in engineering human beings.
No document establishes that any funded scientist worked toward those ends, and nothing suggests they shared them. The New York Times concluded there is no evidence the plan ever came to fruition.
Read the science portfolio next to the trafficking record and a single preoccupation runs through both: human beings as material with a yield.
A woman described as “fully depreciated.” A country called “a great petri dish.” A stated ambition to seed the species with his own genome.
This site does not claim the scientists knew. It notes that the interests he was funding and the language he used about people are continuous with each other.
One Method → · Transhumanism →
Section 05
Who Did Nothing Wrong
A network graph invites the reader to treat every node as implicated. Most are not, and saying so precisely matters more than the graph itself.
Attendance is not participation. The billionaires’ dinners were, in the New York Times’ later phrasing, widely attended. Being in a room Epstein paid for — without knowing he paid for it — establishes nothing.
Funding is not endorsement. A researcher whose grant came through an institution’s development office generally had no visibility into the donor at all.
Named here with no allegation established: Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Lisa Randall, Murray Gell-Mann, Robert Trivers, Ed Boyden, Steven Pinker.
Pinker’s position is that Brockman talked him onto the plane, that he found Epstein’s company unappealing, and that he attended events as a Brockman client. No allegation of wrongdoing has been established against him.
Boyden attended meetings and says he regrets doing so knowing of the conviction, while stating all were solely for research. No Epstein funding to him has been identified.
Where the record is different, this site says so: Seth Lloyd concealed the source of gifts and took $60,000 into a personal account. Joi Ito proposed routing money through another foundation. Lawrence Krauss sought Epstein’s help handling misconduct allegations. Marvin Minsky visited him in jail.
Those are specific, documented acts. The rest of the graph is proximity, and proximity is what a broker manufactures.
Documented act — concealing a donor, taking personal money, seeking help with allegations, visiting him in prison.
Documented connection — an introduction, a dinner, a grant, a shared agent.
The first is evidence about a person. The second is evidence about a network. This page keeps them separate, and the graph should be read with that distinction in hand.
How this site tests claims →
Section 06
Open Questions
The scientific network was not a side interest and it did not run through MIT. It ran through one literary agent, whose salon a convicted sex offender was substantially paying for, and who kept making introductions after the conviction.
Harvard took eight times what MIT did and has never accounted for it. Arizona State’s flagship science programme was largely his money. And the two subjects he cared about personally — eugenics and cryonics — were never anyone’s research programme, only his.
Most of the people on this graph did nothing wrong. That is precisely what made the network worth having.
Section 07
Sources
More Extensive Than We Thought
Aug 2019. Brockman as the access point, the billionaires’ dinners, and the introductions that continued after the conviction.
buzzfeednews.com →Why Did He Cultivate Famous Scientists?
Jan 2026. The Morozov account, Edge’s reach from 1998 to 2018, and Krauss asking Epstein for advice on his misconduct charges.
scientificamerican.com →Epstein’s Gifted Scientists
Jun 2026. The “usual billionaire crowd” email, the request to send a plane for David Brooks, and the Origins Project funding via Leon Black.
liberalcurrents.com →Epstein’s Intellectual Enabler
The Brockman client list — Pinker, Dennett, Minsky, Ito — and why so many academics found themselves answering questions.
newrepublic.com →The Billionaires’ Eugenics Project
Feb 2026. The transhumanism ambition, the George Church funding, and the 2002 TED photograph.
thenerve.news →Funded Largely By and For His Benefit
Sept 2019. The assessment of Edge Foundation funding.
axios.com →John Brockman
The full file — the agency, the $638,000, the 2013 email, and the client list that became the network.
Read the profile →The MIT Timeline
Every gift, event and research group from 2011 to 2019 on one line.
Open the timeline →Education & Academia
Title IX, the credential machine, and the 2026 fallout across six universities.
Read the report →