欢迎! 登陆 注册

高级搜索

A Brief History of Fang Zhouzi’s Plagiarism of His Professor Dr. Root-Bernstein (2092 查看)

November 09, 2012 07:39AM
A Brief History of Fang Zhouzi’s Plagiarism of His Professor Dr. Root-Bernstein


Xin Ge, Ph.D.


(Note: this chronicle is written from my personal experience, knowledge, study, and point of view.
I am the person who is solely responsible for the accuracy of its content. )



May 19, 1995

While being a graduate student in the Michigan State University’s Biochemistry Department, Mr. Fang posted an article, via his MSU email account, on the internet. The title of the article was What Is Science. In the article, Fang didn’t cite any sources. It was found out 15 years later, that the main structure, ideas, arguments, examples, and even words of the article, were copied from Dr. Robert Root-Bernstein paper, "On Defining a Scientific Theory: Creationism Considered," in Evolution and Creationism, Ashley Montagu, ed., The Oxford University Press, 1984. pp. 64-94. (Note: the original webpage of What Is Science could not be found. The original publishing date of the article was inferred from other evidence. See below.)


Nov. 7, 1995

Fang re-posted What Is Science on the internet, via his MSU email account, without any attribution. He explicitly claimed the article was “my essay.” (See: [groups.google.com])


Dec. 8, 1997

Fang re-posted the article as his own work again on Friends of The New Threads, an email discussion group. (See: [xys.cnhub.net])

(Note: The name The New Threads was originally used as the title of an electronic Chinese journal, which started in 1994. It was later used as the name of Fang’s website, started around 1998.)


1998

The New Threads website was set up. On the surface, the website is the outlet of The New Threads Chinese Cultural Society, but in reality, both the Society and the website are under Fang’s autocracy. What Is Science was included in “Fang Zhouzi’s Collected Poems and Essays” on the website. This version of the article did not attribute to Dr. Root-Bernstein until the plagiarism was reported to the Michigan State University 12 years later. (See below.)


March 1, 2000

In an article, entitled Some Questions about Anti-pseudoscience, Fang wrote: “Are there any standards for science? Of course. ……I have summed the standards up into a dozen or so items before,……” (See: [xys.cnhub.net])


June, 2000

Fang’s essay collection, Fang Zhou Online, was published, and What Is Science was one of the essays in the book (pp.187-189.) In this book-version article, Fang did inserted a phrase mentioning the standards were summed up by Dr. Root-Bernstein, but he also deleted a sentence “currently, the Science of Sciences generally thinks...” He did not give the citation and did not use quotation marks. According to my study, the only reason Dr. Fang did such modifications was that, at that time, he had just plagiarized a chapter of Dr. Ernst Mayr’s book, This Is Biology. From that book, Fang knew Dr. Root-Bernstein’s idea was unique, far from “the Science of Sciences generally thinks.”


September, 2000

Fang authorized a science popularization website, www.oursci.org, to publish the original, no-attribution to Dr. Root-Bernstein version of What Is Science.


June 9, 2003

In an article published on The New Threads, Fang quoted a paragraph from What Is Science, and said, “I have been always emphasizing……,” suggesting the ideas and the essay were his. (See: [www.xys.org])


November 9, 2005

In an article published in China Youth, Fang reiterated the main points of What Is Science, but he didn’t mention the ideas were those of Dr. Root-Bernstein’s. (see: [www.xys.org])


February, 2007

Fang’s book, Criticizing Traditional Chinese Medicine, was published. The book’s first section of the first chapter was a re-written and shortened version of What Is Science. Fang did mention Dr. Root-Bernstein, and did give full citation, but he did not use quotation marks. He didn’t mention the connection between the two versions of What Is Science either.


August, 2007

Fang’s book, Fang Zhouzi Solves World Mysteries, was published. In the book, Fang reiterated Dr. Root-Bernstein’s four criteria for scientific theories, but didn’t mention Dr. Root-Bernstein's name.


September, 2010

Xin Ge, who has been studying Fang and the social phenomenon associated with Fang since 2007, discovered the plagiarism case.


October 14, 2010

Xin Ge exposed the case on the internet. (See: [www.rainbowplan.org])


October 16, 2010

Xin Ge announced that he would report the case to Michigan State University. (See: [www.rainbowplan.org])

Fang immediately revealed Xin Ge’s true identity on The New Threads, and, together with his followers, started a smearing and character assassination campaign against Xin Ge.


October 18, 2010

Xin Ge reported the plagiarism case to Michigan State University.


October 19, 2010

Fang altered the webpage of What Is Science on The New Threads, inserting “according to American scholar Robert Root-Bernstein’s summary,” but he forgot to delete “currently, the Science of Sciences generally thinks...” (See: [bbs.creaders.net])


Comparison between the webpages of What Is Science on the New Threads before (left) and after (right) Fang's alteration
The shadowed characters in the right panel are what Fang inserted on Oct. 19, 2010.



Webpage Information shows the time Fang altered his webpage


October 26, 2010

Fang altered the webpage of What Is Science on www.oursci.org, inserting “according to American scholar Robert Root-Bernstein’s summary,” but forgot to delete “currently, the Science of Sciences generally thinks...”


Comparison between the webpages of What Is Science on www.oursci.org before (left) and after (right) Fang's alteration
The shadowed characters in the right panel are what Fang inserted on Oct. 26, 2010.



Webpage Information shows the time Fang altered his webpage


November 19, 2010

Dr. James Pivarnik, the Research Integrity Officer at MSU, signed the Assessment Report, refusing to refer the allegation to an Inquiry. His reason was: “There was no credible Evidence presented that showed clearly that the Respondent published his essay in 1995 without attribution to Dr. Root-Bernstein because there is no credible Evidence of Dr. Fang’s essay as it appeared online in 1995.”

Xin Ge wrote back to Dr. James Pivarnik, providing credible evidence demonstrating that Fang did publish his essay in 1995 without attribution to Dr. Root-Bernstein.


December 2, 2010

Dr. James Pivarnik wrote back to Xin Ge, upheld his own decision of no-Inquiry, citing yet another reason: Fang’s What Is Science was not related to his academic fulfillment at MSU.


December 7, 2010

Xin Ge wrote to Dr. J. Ian Gray, Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies at MSU, citing MSU’s Procedures Concerning Allegations of Misconduct In Research and Creative Activities, challenging Dr. James Pivarnik’s decision.


January 19, 2011

The review panel convened by Dr. J. Ian Gray upheld Dr. James Pivarnik’s decision, saying “the essay which is the basis of the Complainants’ Allegation does not constitute Research or Creative Activities because it was not prepared or submitted by ‘a student in fulfillment of any independent study requirement at the University.’”


February 11, 2011

Xin Ge filed a complaint with Dr. Ke Hua, the coordinator of China Academic Integrity Review, an U. S. based website (link: [www.2250s.com]), asking him to convene a panel to review the case.


February 14, 2011

Dr. Ke Hua sent Xin Ge’s complaint to Dr. Fang, asking him to defend for himself. Fang never responded to this request.


February 15, 2011

Ms. Cao Minghua, a well-known Chinese writer based in southern California, posted her article, Interview Yi Ming. The article revealed to the public for the first time the detail of MSU’s investigation of Fang’s plagiarism case. (See: [www.2250s.com])


February 16, 2011

Fang posted a series of notes on The New Threads, saying the MSU’s refusal to further Inquiry was because the complainants did not provide credible evidence. He threatened a lawsuit to any new media who dare to publish Ms. Cao’s article.


February 17, 2011

Fang posted a portion of the memo he received from Dr. James Pivarnik to back up his claim that MSU’s no-Inquiry decision was made because there was no credible evidence to demonstrate his stealing.

Xin Ge immediately wrote to Dr. James Pivarnik, asking for clarification.


February 18, 2011

Dr. James Pivarnik wrote back to Xin Ge, attached a statement about the case. The full text of the statement is:

On Oct. 18 Michigan State University’s Office of Research Integrity (RIO) was notified of an allegation of research misconduct against former MSU student Shi‐Min Fang. The complainants alleged Fang, while still a student, plagiarized a previously published work and posted it on a Chinese website in 1995. Fang completed his PhD at MSU in 1995. MSU’s RIO completed a preliminary assessment of this case as is mandated by our procedures. For any student writing to be considered research or creative activity, it must be related to academic activities (e.g., independent studies, theses, dissertations, etc). The preliminary assessment revealed that the piece posted to the website was not related to Fang’s academic activities as a PhD student, including his dissertation, which was being completed in 1995. As is allowed by our procedures, the complainants challenged this decision to the Vice‐President for Research and Graduate Studies, and he appointed a three member panel to review the challenge. The panel upheld the RIO’s ruling. MSU will not review the case further.

It is important to note that MSU’s procedures only allow examination of cases that may have occurred when an individual was associated as a student, faculty, or staff at MSU. In this case, anything that may have been published after Fang graduated in 1995 is not within the university’s scope of responsibility or jurisdiction.

James Pivarnik
MSU Research Integrity Officer



February 25, 2011

Shenzhen Economic Daily and Yangzhou Times published a report, reporting Xin Ge’s discovery that one of Fang’s articles, The Misreading of IQ, is a translational version of Harvard professor Stephen Jay Gould’s The Mismeasure of Man, and University of Western Ontario professor Alexander Keewatin Dewdney’s Yes, We Have No Neutrons. This is the first time that Chinese new media reported Fang’s plagiarism.


March 2, 2011

Dr. Ke Hua announced that a seven-member Academic Misconduct Assessment Panel had been organized according to the Procedure, and they would review the case independently from each other.


March 30, 2011

Chinese newspaper Legal Weekly published an article, entitled “A Comprehensive Investigation of Fang Zhouzi’s Plagiarism.” The MSU case was one of the three cases reported.


March 31, 2011

Dr. Fang vowed that he would sue Legal Weekly for citing Dr. Root-Bernstein’s comment, “I consider it plagiarism.” Fang claimed that Dr. Root-Bernstein could not have said that. (See: [blog.sina.com.cn])


April 1, 2011

Several articles defending Fang’s plagiarism appeared on The New Threads. One article, written by Fang’s long-time supporter and mind-master of Fang’s money-collecting machine OSAIC (Organization for Scientific & Academic Integrity in China), Dr. Eddie Cheng, claimed that Fang only re-phrased and “fair-use[d]” Dr. Root-Bernstein’s paper, therefore Fang neither committed plagiarism, nor infringed the copyright. Yet another person, under a fake name “Heaven and Earth’s Conscience”, citing Baker v. Selden,101 U.S. 99 (1879), claiming that under U. S. copyright law, copying other people’s ideas does not constitute plagiarism.


April 7, 2011

Dr. Ke Hua published The Academic Misconduct Assessment Panel’s Verdict. The panel “unanimously determined that, in light of the totality of circumstances Dr. Fang’s conduct as displayed in his 1995 essay constituted plagiarism.” This is the 5th time Dr. Fang has been convicted by a panel of China Academic Integrity Review since December, 2010.




April 13, 2011

Legal Weekly published an article by Xin Ge, exposing Fang’s another plagiarism case. This time, the victim was a Chinese social scientist. (See: [www.legalweekly.cn])


April 27, 2011

Legal Weekly published an article, reporting that Ms. Liu Juhua, a Xinhua News Agency reporter and Fang’s wife and feverish fan, wrote her Master’s thesis by directly copying other peoples’ words, mostly from the internet, which constitute more than 90% of the thesis. (See: [www.legalweekly.cn])

Fang immediately threatened the whole nation that if his wife were punished for this, he would devote the rest of his life to muckraking other peoples’ academic degree theses.


April 28, 2011

Fang announced that the lawsuit against Legal Daily, Legal Weekly’s parent newspaper, was filed. (Note: The court opening of the case was postponed several times since then, at Dr. Fang’s interventions. It was finally dismissed by the court in April, 2012, for the reason of suing the wrong defendant.Fang has yet to file a new lawsuit against Legal Weekly.)


July 27, 2011

Dr. Root-Bernstein was interviewed by a Chinese newspaper reporter in Lansing, Michigan.


August 3, 2011

Dr. Root-Bernstein sent an open letter to Fang Zhouzi, copied to more than 30 people, including Fang’s Ph.D. adviser Dr. Zachary Burton, and Michigan State University officials.


August 8, 2011

NATIONAL BUSINESS DAILY reported the MSU case. (link: [old.nbd.com.cn]).


August 21, 2011

Shenzhen Economic Daily reported the MSU case. (link: [szsb.sznews.com]).


August 23, 2011

Legal Evening News reported the case. (link: [www.fawan.com.cn]).



So far, more than 90 plagiarism cases committed by Dr. Fang have been documented.

Fang Zhouzi has pirated more than 1,700 images from the internet, many of them are copyrighted.




被编辑4次。最后被亦明编辑于02/17/2013 05:02AM。
附件:
打开 | 下载 - 6_To VPRGS.pdf (39.9 KB)
打开 | 下载 - RIOstatement.pdf (41.4 KB)
主题 发布者 已发表

A Brief History of Fang Zhouzi’s Plagiarism of His Professor Dr. Root-Bernstein (2092 查看) 附件

亦明 November 09, 2012 07:39AM



对不起,只有注册用户才能发帖。

登陆

2250s.com does not represent or guarantee the truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any of communications posted by users.

This forum powered by Phorum.