欢迎! 登陆 注册


Part V: Shameless, fraudulent, and malicious fighter (5166 查看)

November 18, 2012 12:10PM
【Note: The PDF file is more reader-friendly. Click the title to open it.】

Shamelessness Shouldn’t Be Anyone’s Nature
──An Open Letter to Nature (Part V)

Xin Ge, Ph. D.

Columbia, SC, USA

Shameless, fraudulent, and malicious fighter

To most Chinese, Fang's 40 second speech in accepting John Maddox prize was a shocker. Indeed, it was one of the most watched and most talked about video clips on Chinese internet in the last few days. No, Chinese people didn't care much about the John Maddox prize. In fact, many people thought the prize was bought by Fang and his gangsters, because they have been playing this kind of tricks all the times. (See Appendix for some examples.)

So, why are Chinese people shocked by Fang's speech? Of course because of his broken English. Here is the original speech script Fang wrote, posted on his blog, and soon deleted:

“I am truely honored to receive John Maddox Prize. Science in China faces great challenge from superstition, pseudo-science, anti-science and scientific misconduct. There are more and more Chinese people realize this is a big problem and are standing up for science. I consider this award as an acknowledgement for our efforts from international science community and I deeply appreciate it. Thank you.” (Bold font and underline are mine, they designate the words which would be corrected later by others.)

Here is Fang's speech script prettified and posted by Sense About Science, the organizer of the John Maddox prize:

“I'm truly honoured to receive the John Maddox Prize. Science in China faces great challenges from superstition, psuedoscience, anti-science and scientific misconduct. There are more and more Chinese people who realise this is a big problem and are standing up for science. I consider this award as an acknowledgement of our efforts from the international science community and I deeply appreciate it. Thank you.” (Bold font and underline are mine, they designate the words which were corrected.)

Here is a widely circulated transcript of Fang’s speech, deciphered by an anonymous person:

“I'm truly honered to receive Jiang-Mados prize. Sciemce in tryna feces great trenge from superstiction, pseudosciemce, anti-sciemce, and sciemtific misconduct. There are more and more trynese people realize this is a big problem and are standing up for sciemce. I consider this a war as acknowledgement of our effort from international sciemce community. And I deeply appreci A it. Thank you!”

Here is a website where many Chinese have been trying to imitate Fang’ speech.

Fang’s official release of his speech script in accepting John Maddox Prize

Fang deleted the post soon after many people pointing out the mistakes in it.

Chinese people do know that oriental, Chinese as well as Japanese and Korean, have difficulty in mastering the western languages, especially orally. But Chinese are still “truely” shocked by Fang's broken English, not merely because it was truly broken, by any standard; even not because it was written and spoken by an American Ph. D.; Chinese people are shocked by Fang's English because that Fang has been constantly implying that he possesses excellent English skills by boasting his American credentials to them. Not only that. Fang has been constantly criticizing and laughing at other people’s English, especially his enemies’ English. As a matter of fact, attacking other people’s English is an important and integral part of his so called “standing up for science” activities in China.

There are at least two reasons why Fang has such a deep affection for using English as a weapon to humiliate and destroy his opponents. First, Fang's “standing up for science” activities cover all kind of sciences, from history and philosophy of science, to biomedicine, to urology, to seismology, to ecology, to semiconductor science, and to TCM. Because of his astonishing ignorance, Fang has been defeated by the experts in these special areas many times. To revenge on these people, English became the last and only legitimate weapon available to him. Second, Chinese people have an unusual and inconceivable zeal for English, which is evidenced in Crazy English phenomenon. If a Chinese person speaks fluent English, he will be well respected; and if a scholar makes simple mistakes in English, he will be looked down, and his academic reputation will be hurt badly. Of course, Fang wants to “take advantage of the situation.”

So, specifically, why did Fang use English as a weapon to “stand up for science”?

In March, 1999, a few months after quitting his scientist career, Fang wrote two articles to criticize a Chinese translation of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Social Contract. (Fang Zhouzi. No sentence without errors: The online Chinese translation of Social Contract.《无句不误的〈社会契约论〉网上中译本》; A few stupid mistakes in the online Chinese translation of Social Contract.《〈社会契约论〉网上中译本的几处“妙译”》). Of course Social Contract has nothing to do with science, neither the Chinese translation. The only reason behind Fang's attacks was that the translator, Qilin, was one of the people who nicknamed Fang “Dr. Lard” three years ago. (Yi Ming. English is Fang Zhouzi's secret weapon to attack people. 《英语是方舟子打人的暗器》).

As mentioned in Part I of this letter, Fang initiated an attack on Harvard scientist Dr. Wu Bolin because his book was about the same subject as Fang's ongoing book. Dr. Wu fought back by publishing an article in China Reading Weekly, pointing out Fang's ignorance in cell biology, molecular genetics, and reproduction science. (Wu Bolin. Exactly who is fantasizing? A refutation to Fang Zhouzi's “The fantasized ‘Human body revolution’.”究竟谁“虚妄”──驳方舟子〈虚妄的“人体革命”〉》). Wu's article probably was the first article ever published in a print medium exposing Fang's shallowness and ignorance in science, which, of course, is the most frightening thing to Fang. Therefore, Fang retaliated like crazy. One of his retaliatory articles was entitled Give Dr. Wu Bolin two (English) assignments first (《先给吴柏林博士布置两道作业》). The two assignments were two paragraphs from Encyclopaedia Britannica, which was available online in 2000, and Fang wanted Dr. Wu to translate them into Chinese. Why? Because they were Fang's very source of knowledge when he attacked Dr. Wu initially. The fact is, these articles were at least 17 years old in 2000, because the latest reference cited in the articles was published in 1983. Yes, American Ph. D. Fang was using articles published more than one sixth of century ago to “stand up for science,” in this case, for molecular genetics, and after being pointed out his ignorance, he still wanted to use them to fight back! What a joker! (For detailed story, see Yi Ming. Why Fang Zhouzi busts nutrient nucleic acids?方舟子为什么要打“核酸营养品”?》).

In 2000, Dr. Liu Huajie of Peking University tried to get Fang an adjunct professorship in the department of philosophy at PKU. The plan failed, and Fang suspected the person who derailed the plan was Dr. Wu Guosheng, the vice chairman of the department. Since then, Fang has been “looking for evidence” to destroy him. In early 2003, the Chinese translation of Thomas Kuhn’s The Copernican Revolution was published, and Dr. Wu was one of the translators and the proofreader of the book. Fang immediately wrote an article entitled “The mistakes in Wu Guosheng’s translation of The Copernican Revolution.” (《吴国盛乱译〈哥白尼革命〉举例》). (For detailed story, see Yi Ming. The complete story about Fang Zhouzi's attacks on Wu Guosheng. 《方舟子棒打吴国盛始末》).

Six months after attacking Dr. Wu Guosheng's English, Fang wrote another article to attack Dr. Liu Huajie's English, “Associate Professor Liu Huajie's translation and academic corruption.” (《刘华杰副教授的翻译和学术腐败》). Yes, the “Associate Professor Liu Huajie” in 2003 was the same Liu Huajie who interviewed Fang in 2000, who helped Fang to publish one of his first books in China in 2000, who spent his own money to rent a classroom in PKU for Fang’s talk in 2000, and who tried his best to introduce Fang to Peking University and the community of history and philosophy of science in China. And by 2003, Dr. Liu's value in use had been exhausted and he became Fang's enemy No. 1. As a matter of fact, Fang's hatred toward Dr. Liu was so intense that it was not enough merely to point out how bad Dr. Liu's English was. Fang went an extra light-year to link Dr. Liu's supposed bad English to academic corruption. 【On the home page of the New Threads, there is a link to a special collection of anti-Liu Huajie articles, named “Liu Huajie Incidence” (《刘华杰事件》), which, as of today, contains 172 articles, more than 3 dozens of them were written by Fang himself. For why and how the relationship between Fang and Liu deteriorated, see Yi Ming. The complete story about Fang Zhouzi's attacks on Liu Huajie. 《方舟子棒打刘华杰始末》.】

To most people, it seems a mission impossible for a person with broken English like Fang's to win any English wars. But ironically, it appears that Fang did win some of them, since neither Qilin nor Dr. Wu Guosheng responded to Fang's attacks. Dr. Wu Bolin stopped his response to Fang after his first reply, thus avoided the fate of Dr. Xiao Chuanguo, who would be jailed simply because his “standing up for science” and “standing up” against Fang. So, how did Fang won these victories? He has some strategies: First, he constantly remind Chinese people that he is an American Ph. D. who had studied in America for more than a dozen years (“留美十三年的美国博士”), and have developed “American living habits” (“在美国生活时养成的习惯”), which, according to his way of thinking, means that he has been pre-qualified to be an English and science critic or judge, his readers don’t need to pay attention to “the importance of looking for evidence” to check his eligibility. Second, Fang picks up other people's small English errors as many as possible and as often as he could to make people assume he is an English expert. Third, to prevent Chinese people from knowing his real English proficiency, Fang had never spoken English in public; had always rejected the requests for face-to-face or oral interview by western journalists, before the “Jiang-Mados prize” incidence. It is really unfortunate for Fang that by accepting the “Jiang-Mados prize,” he has to write a speech and open his mouth to read it aloud, and it is even disastrous that the prize organizer and sponsors made the video public.

Here is an example showing how Fang fights his English wars. In early 2004, Fang wrote a series of 4 articles attacking Dr. Liu Huajie's translation of “On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research,” even before he saw the full text. However, Fang's bad English was revealed in his attacking articles, and his mistakes were reported in a newspaper. To defend himself, Fang wrote yet another article, in which he said:

“If journalist Wen ……could believe that an American Ph.D. who had studied in America for thirteen years could be completely wrong in understanding and translating simple English, his English reading capability is even worse than a home-made Ph.D. who only traveled in America once,……why don’t you ask an English expert and let him express his opinion using his true identity?” (Original Chinese: “温记者…如果会去相信一位留美十三年的美国博士对简单的英文也会‘全部理解和翻译错误’,英文阅读理解能力甚至比不上只到美国转过一圈的‘土’博士,……难道不会去采访一下英语翻译专家,请他用真实身份发表一下看法?” Fang Zhouzi. Whitewashing bad translation: The 5th comment on the Chinese translation of “On Being a Scientist.”为劣质翻译涂脂抹粉——五评〈怎样当一名科学家〉中译本》).

Fang came to America at the end of 1990, and finished his “study” in America by 1998. Not only he spent the rest of his time solely on the Chinese internet, he also spent most of his “study” time, from August 1993 to December 1998, on the Chinese internet, which was one of the major causes of his bad English and bad science. However, these facts could not prevent Fang from lying to Chinese public: “an American Ph.D. had studied in America for thirteen years.” Does Nature know any more shamelessly “padded CVs” than Fang's? It is even more disgusting that Fang used this padded experience as an “evidence” for his English proficiency. Someone might not understand the meaning of Fang's last sentence in the above quote, so let me help you: By asking “an English expert” to use “his true identity” to comment on the battle between him and one of his opponents, Fang knew he assigned the journalist an impossible mission, because most English experts in China do not have the guts to criticize “fraud fighter” Fang, if they do, they know they would definitely be his next targets to fight against, or, in Nature's words, to “stand up” against!

There is another strategy Fang uses to fight off his opponents: group attacks and public humiliation. Fang's thugs are a group of creatures who are extremely loyal and obedient to Fang, in exactly the same manner as cult members to their leader. They are also extremely vicious and violent, so whenever Fang attacks a person, they will scramble forward like mad dogs to get their bites. Fang not only instigates and encourages them, he would personally collect their vicious, malicious, and venomous comments, put them into a post, give the post a title like “Netizens’ comments,”(“众人评”, “网人评”, “读者评”), and publish it as one of “The Newly Arrived” on the home page of “his New Threads website.” (So far, Fang has compiled more than one hundred such “Netizens’ comments.”) Let’s take a look at a few examples.

In Netizens’ comments on Liu Huajie's translation of On Being a Scientist (《众人评论〈怎样当一名科学家〉刘华杰译文》), there is a comment:

“Take Translator Liu out and shoot him to death. There are so many mistakes in these few sentences, each mistake deserves 10-years in jail, and the punishments can be combined.” (Original Chinese: “把刘翻译拉出去毙了算了。翻几句话出这么多错,每个错误都够判十年,可以数罪并罚了。”

In Netizens’ comments on Penggui’s “Auntie Liu of the neighborhood committee in the anti-science center of mental retardation department at PKU is angry” (《鹏归〈北大弱智系反科学中心居委会刘大妈生气了〉(附众人评论)》), there are following two comments:

“Sissy Liu in the mental retardation department at PKU is a suspect of using public devices for private purpose.” (Original Chinese: “北大弱智系的刘花姐有公器私用的嫌疑。”)

“He has indeed used the public devices in his private part. It is really outrageous, too horrible to look at.” (Original Chinese: “他的确是把公器用在了私处,实在是不像话,惨不忍睹呀”).

Does Nature really think this kind of behavior is acceptable in the name of “standing up for science”?

Let me ask Nature again, what kind of science needs a person like Fang for “standing up for,” and, exactly, for what?

【Appendix: Examples of Fang’s shameless self-promotion】

In 2000, Dr. Liu Huajie spent his own money to rent a classroom in Peking University, and let Fang give an informal talk in that classroom to a small group of students. Fang would describe such an event on “his website” as he had been invited by Peking University to give a formal speech by posting “Poster of Fang Zhouzi's speech at Peking University” (《方舟子在北京大学的演讲海报》) and “Photographs of Fang Zhouzi’s speech at Peking University” (《方舟子在北京大学演讲的照片》).

In 2001, some of Fang’s friends in Beijing treated Fang with a dinner, Fang would declare that the Beijing intellectual community gave him a welcome banquet. (Original Chinese: “北京知识界人士为我洗尘的一个宴会”).

On July 5, 2012, Fang announced on his blog that he had given a seminar to the journalism school at Tsinghua University. However, the secret was immediately revealed: one of Fang’s followers at Tsinghua University found an empty classroom and forced some students to sit in to be Fang's audience.

Last week, while he was a laughingstock on the internet, Fang showed off again, saying he had given speeches in U. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH), places are so famous that “reverberate like thunder.” Fang later admitted, both speeches were arranged and attended by local Chinese, and given in Chinese, so FDA and NIH had nothing to do with the events, except they were held in their buildings.

The fact is, if any of Fang's enemies does things remotely similar to what Fang just did, Fang would definitely accuse him of fraud. For example, in 2005, Fang accused Dr. Yu Jianrong, “a prominent Chinese scholar who researches rural development,” of cheating, because Dr. Yu said he had given a speech at Harvard, but according to Fang and his gangsters, Dr. Yu doesn’t understand basic English conversation, so he could not give a speech, so he must have been lying. (Original Chinese: “于建嵘自称在哈佛大学费正清中心做了长篇演讲,而他其实连最基本的英语会话也不懂。” Fang Zhouzi. A review of ‘prominent scholar’ Yu Jianrong’s scolding incidence. 《“著名学者”于建嵘骂人事件述评》).

Fang shows off his passes to U.S. government agencies on his blog on Nov. 10, 2012

Fang’s American audience in NIH
Fang brags on his blog that he delivered a speech in NIH on Nov. 9, 2012. The photo was posted by Fang and it shows that all the audience looked like Chinese. As Fang revealed later, at University of Maryland, someone yelled “shameless,” someone questioned him aggressively, and at least one person had a plan to throw shoes at him.

Fang’s American audience at University of Pennsylvania

The person next to Fang in green is Sima Nan, one of the most despised and fraudulent public and political figures in China. Like Fang, Sima is also a disciple of pseudoscientist He Zuoxiu. Fang maintains an extraordinarily close relationship with Sima. The photo was posted by Fang on his blog on Nov. 14, 2012.

Previous parts of my Open Letter to Nature:

Part I

Part II

Part III

Part IV

被编辑4次。最后被亦明编辑于08/05/2013 07:09AM。
打开 | 下载 - Shamelessness shouldn\'t be anyone\'s Nature V.pdf (420.3 KB)
主题 发布者 已发表

Shamelessness Shouldn’t Be Anyone’s Nature ──An Open Letter to Nature (Part I) (6662 查看) 附件

亦明 November 09, 2012 08:46AM

Part II: Shameless “standing-up” (4049 查看) 附件

亦明 November 09, 2012 12:05PM

Part III: Shameless make-up (4433 查看) 附件

亦明 November 11, 2012 10:06PM

Part IV: Fact distortion and mess-up (3585 查看) 附件

亦明 November 13, 2012 11:57PM

Part V: Shameless, fraudulent, and malicious fighter (5166 查看) 附件

亦明 November 18, 2012 12:10PM

Part VI: A fake scientist’s fight against science (4242 查看) 附件

亦明 November 23, 2012 06:28AM

Part VII: A fraudulent fighter’s fight for fraud (4070 查看) 附件

亦明 November 28, 2012 09:46AM

Part VIII: A fighting dog for commercial and political forces (3579 查看) 附件

亦明 December 03, 2012 05:21PM

Part IX: An evil villain's fight for his career (4020 查看) 附件

亦明 December 09, 2012 05:36PM

Part X: A congenital liar has Nature as his amplifier (3534 查看) 附件

亦明 December 16, 2012 11:51AM

Part XI: Fang’s Law (4899 查看) 附件

亦明 January 29, 2013 12:16AM

Part XII: Fang’s Law-II (4780 查看) 附件

亦明 February 04, 2013 10:40AM

Part XIII: A Thief Couple (4644 查看) 附件

亦明 February 10, 2013 06:14PM

Part XIV: A 24K Pure Evil (4584 查看) 附件

亦明 February 17, 2013 07:28PM

Part XV: An Unprecedented Professional Literary Thief (4776 查看) 附件

亦明 February 24, 2013 08:00PM

Part XVI: The Science Case (2797 查看) 附件

亦明 March 03, 2013 07:31PM

Part XVII: The Nature-Science Case (3276 查看) 附件

亦明 March 10, 2013 06:41PM

Part XVIII: The Harvard Case (I) (3246 查看) 附件

亦明 March 17, 2013 06:36PM

Part XIX: The Harvard Case (II) (4418 查看) 附件

亦明 March 24, 2013 02:40PM

Part XX: The Longevity Case (7039 查看) 附件

亦明 March 31, 2013 03:55PM

Part XXI: The Naked Mole-Rat Case (11006 查看) 附件

亦明 April 07, 2013 06:05PM



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

This forum powered by Phorum.