欢迎! 登陆 注册

高级搜索

Part XV: An Unprecedented Professional Literary Thief (4616 查看)

February 24, 2013 08:00PM
【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 XV)


Xin Ge, Ph. D.

Columbia, SC, USA



In the previous 14 parts of this letter, I have mainly showed Fang’s fraudulent “fraud fighter” side, with mountains of evidence. Fang has claimed repeatedly since 2010 that he, and his New Threads, had busted more than a thousand fraud cases in the past 10 years, and he had made no major mistakes in the cases busted by himself[1]. Obviously, Fang has been lying, unless he can refute what I have written. The fact is, since January, 2011, I have asked Fang publicly and via email numerous times for a list of 100 fraud cases he or his New Threads has busted, one tenth of the number Fang claimed, and Fang has never responded to my request yet[2]. I believe it is now the responsibility of Nature, as well as Kohn Foundation and Sense About Science, the sponsors and the organizer of John Maddox Prize, respectively, to ask your hero to refute my open letter to Nature, or show the world his list of 1,000 fraud cases, or both. Failure to do so by either side, awarders and awardee, means dereliction of duty and loss of credibility.

In the following parts, I’ll show you another side of Fang’s.


An Unprecedented Professional Literary Thief: An Overview

As I have mentioned repeatedly, the fact that Fang is a plagiarizer has been known to many Chinese netizens since 2001. However, most people, myself included, thought Fang’s plagiarism was a matter of occasional oversights or missteps rather than intentional stealing and habitual activity. However, it was Fang’s eccentric reactions to the criticism against him which alerted people that there must be something fishy on this side of Fang’s[3]. Therefore, in October of 2010, a spontaneous, yet coordinated, campaign started to explore the secret history of Fang’s plagiarism on the website of China Academic Integrity Review (AIR-China). And what being dug out is a gigantic literary thief unprecedented in human history. In 2011, I summed up four characteristics of plagiarizer Fang: 1.The length of his plagiarism history is unparalleled; 2. The amount of his plagiarism is unheard of; 3. The aggressiveness of his self-plagiarism is rarely seen; and 4. The brazenness of his robbery is horrifying[4]. Now, let me show you some evidences.

Subconscious Admission

In 1993, Fang revealed in an essay that when he was a middle school student, his essays were frequently selected as model essays “for other students to plagiarize.”[5] 15 years later, in 2008, Fang reiterated his story in a sense of generalization:

“Since childhood we have been guided by our teachers to recite model essays to cope with composition examinations, thus having developed the habit of plagiarism.”[6]

Fang’s experience of his childhood education must be very unique in China, because even though students in China’s elementary and middle schools have been indeed taught how to write by reading model essays, but to my knowledge, it is unthinkable that any teacher would teach his/her students to plagiarize these model essays, because it is so stupid that the plagiarizer could be caught easily, and once being caught, the plagiarizer will be horribly humiliated[7].

The fact is, the Chinese term of “plagiarism” (剽窃) appeared as early as in Tang Dynasty (618-907), and those who committed plagiarism were regarded as thief (贼) during that time[8]. Dai Zhen (or Tai Chen, 1724-1777), a renowned scholar in Qing Dynasty, was accused of plagiarism shortly after his death, and the accusation has been widely considered a great insult to his reputation, hence one of his followers, Dr. Hu Shi (or Hu Shih, 1891-1962), China’s ambassador to the U. S. during 1938-1942 and ex-president of Peking University between 1946 and 1949, spent more than a dozen years trying to clean Dai’s name[9]. In other words, in Chinese culture, plagiarism has been considered wrong, and plagiarizers are universally disrespected, despised, and disdained, period. On the other hand, “plagiarism” entered into English in 17th century, and until 18th century, plagiarism was a “perfectly acceptable practice” in America[10].

However, Fang’s revelations, obviously intended to imply that most Chinese are immoral, they don’t know plagiarism is plain wrong, and he is an exception to these immoral Chinese because he was plagiarized by them from very beginning, sound like a confession made subconsciously: it tells us what kind of education Fang received in his hometown which is famous for fakery: Yunxiao County of Fujian Province is the capital of fake cigarettes in China[11]. It also explains why until 1995, after studying in America for five year, Fang was still shamelessly bragging that he was a skillful veteran literary thief[12]. The revelations also tell us why has he defended his wife’s plagiarism by accusing other people of ALSO stealing, because deep in his heart, Fang believes that everybody writes articles by plagiarizing, so plagiarism is Chinese people’s original sin, and he is able to convict any person of plagiarism at his will.

The Evolution of a Plagiarizer

1. A poet

According to Fang’s self-introduction on his New Threads, he has three identities: a biochemist, a poet, and a netizen[13]. Also according to Fang, his poet career started in his freshman year in high school when he imitated a small poem, A Stray Dandelion, by Bei Dao, arguably the most famous Misty Poet, to write his A Little Stray Satyrid[14]. The fact is, except for the title, Fang has never revealed other information about his debut poem, but he bragged that several years after writing the poem, he modified it, and the signs of imitation were completely eliminated[15]. That modified version of A Little Stray Satyrid was later identified as his Satyridae Specimens, written in 1988 while he was a college student at University of Science and Technology of China. Although no shadow of Bei Dao could be detected in that poem, the shadow of Gu Cheng, another famous misty poet, could be easily noticed[16]. Therefore, it seems that Fang’s way of poetry writing was the same as what he was taught how to write essays: reciting (imitating) model essays (poems).

Fang’s poet career never took off, but in 1995, the year he was receiving his doctoral degree from Michigan State University, he was confident enough to teach other people how to write poems. In an article entitled An Unique Skill of Writing Poems to Deceive the World, Fang wrote:

“Based on my multi-years personal experience of fooling around in the domestic and international youth poetry circles, I have found an infallible unique poetry writing skill. An ancient saying goes, in poetry writing, each sentence, even each word or character, should have its literary allusion. That was about writing ancient-style poetry. It can be applied to new style poetry writing as well. The only thing is, you have to hide your sources so that other people won’t know where your sentences come from. If you can do that, you have reached a new level.”[17]

In other words, Fang’s unique skill was plagiarizing other people and covering up the plagiarism. Obviously, this unique skill was not limited to his poetry writing.

2. A Ming History expert

According to my analysis, the only reason that Fang wanted to be a poet was because he thought that was the easiest and fastest way he could get his fame[18]. However, by 1993, Fang had already known that he had no talent in poetry at all, so he began to look for new paths to fame, and he did find it in the emerging Chinese Internet. In the first half year of his internet indulgence, from August 1993 to February 1994, Fang pretended to be a Ming History expert by posting more than 50 short articles about the history of Ming Dynasty, under the title of A Brief History of the Great Ming (大明小史), on the internet. Even though Fang’s Ming History writings were full of low level mistakes, considering Fang’s background─no training in history whatsoever─, they were still quite a feat. The question is, how did Fang accomplish the feat? Of course, the answer is by his “unique skill,” plagiarizing and covering up the plagiarism. It was demonstrated about 3 years ago by me that most of Fang’s Ming history writings were plagiarized from two sources, Xu Cang Shu by Li Zhi (1527-1602), and The Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang by Wu Han (1909-1969)[19].


The victims of Fang’s plagiarism: Ming History experts Li Zhi and Wu Han


Fang’s lack of training in historiography in general, and his ignorance in Ming History in particular, was exposed in early 1994, by a person named Du Ren, on China News Digest, an online Chinese newsletter and journal. After a few rounds of debates, China News Digest refused to publish Fang’s retaliatory articles anymore, and that’s why Fang, together with other people, found The New Threads, an online Chinese journal, in February, 1994. The most famous article Fang has published in this journal was an essay commemorating the 410th birthday of a Ming general Yuan Chonghuan, The Feat Was Too Great It Became a Crime, published in September and October issues of The New Threads in 1994, which brought him huge fame and many fans[20]. However, it was demonstrated a few years ago that Fang wrote the entire article, including historical data, based upon a work by Jin Yong, a martial arts novelist without training in history, and that’s why Fang made so many laughable, many of them factual, mistakes, estimated to be about 100, in the essay[21]. Fang has remained silent on all the plagiarism allegations against his Ming History articles, meanwhile, he keeps publishing them in his books[22].

3. A philosopher of science

With his English skill growing, from about 1995, Fang began to hunt his prey in English world. Must have been inspired by an anti-pseudoscience movement in China led by Mr. He Zuoxiu, “the biggest pseudoscientist in the world,” Fang decided to pretend to be a philosopher of science, hence he found his prey on the campus of Michigan State University, Dr. Robert Root-Bernstein, and wrote his infamous essay What Is Science, to engage in an online fight against the Christian religion. The plagiarism case evolved into a landmark in Chinese education history and the history of Sino-US relations, when Dr. Root-Bernstein publicly accused Fang of plagiarism in August, 2011. To my knowledge, no overseas Chinese student has ever been accused of plagiarizing his own professor, and pursued by that victimized professor years later. (The story will be told in detail later.)

The fact is, Fang knew almost nothing about Christianity, just like he knew nothing, and still does, about traditional Chinese medicine, so to show his support to Mr. He’s anti- pseudoscience movement in China, Fang had to plagiarize. In1999, Fang plagiarized a website to write his What Is Atheism. In 2000, he plagiarized Dr. Thomas Goldstein to write his Who Is the Enemy of Science.

Besides his anti-religion articles, Fang also plagiarized Dr. Ernst Mayr to write his What Is Life, which was used as the first chapters of his books, New Chapter of Evolution Theory and Inquiry into Life: The Controversies in Gene Age, in 2000 and early 2001, respectively. (The story will be told in detail later.)

4. A popular science writer

Fang’s original career plan after quitting his scientific research in 1998 was to become an “advanced science writer,” like Ernst Mayr and Stephen Jay Gould[23]. However, he must have found out soon in the early 2000s that like he had no talent in poetry, he had no ability to imitate Drs. Mayr and Gould. On the other hand, with more and more involvement in China’s affairs, including marrying his wife Liu Juhua in 2002, Fang’s profession, or career, became a concern to many Chinese people, they wanted to know more about Fang, especially his job in the United States. So, gradually, Fang accepted the title of “popular science writer” bestowed upon him by the “scientific intellectuals.”[24] For this reason, Fang’s plagiarism activities entered into a new, and much vaster, territory.

Between August 30 to December 6, 2001, Fang published 4 popular science articles in Southern Weekend, the most influential newspaper in China at that time. It turned out that all four articles were stolen from articles published in journal Nature, Science magazine, The New York Times, and Time magazine, respectively. The Science case was the first identified Fang’s plagiarism case, and it was also the beginning of Fang’s deadly hatred to Dr. Xiao Chuanguo, who reported the case to Science magazine shortly after the case was discovered. (The story will be told in detail later.)

In early 2002, Fang plagiarized Dr. S. J. Gould’s The Mismeasure of Man and Dr. A. K. Dewdney’s Yes, We Have no Neutrons, to write his lengthy Misreading of IQ, which would be published in print media five times in five years. The fraud was discovered in late 2010, and became national news on Feb. 25, 2011 when Shenzhen Economic Daily reported it. As mentioned before, it was the first time a Chinese print medium reported Fang as a suspect of plagiarizer. (The story will be told in detail later.)

One of the major features of Fang’s plagiarism during this period was that Fang’s preys were mainly prestigious newspapers and journals, as well as well-known scholars.

5. Dr. Omniscience

After 2002, with the rise of his fame, Fang had more and more channels to dispose his stolen goods, therefore Fang’s plagiarism became increasingly bold and decreasingly picky: websites, popular media, and even his own New Threads and himself could be the victims of his greed. For example, in early 2003, Fang published two articles with essentially the same contents about ginseng in two different news media. The two articles were published again in 2007 in two of Fang’s books. The fact is, both articles were plagiarized from the same Chinese source, an article by a research fellow in the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. A full-length article exposing the plagiarism was published on April 13, 2011, in Legal Weekly, and Fang has not made a single comment on it yet. Why? Because the article showed eight “ironclad proofs” demonstrating that Fang did commit plagiarism, so there is no way Fang could refute the allegation[25].

As mentioned in Part VII of this letter, Fang plagiarized two members of New Threads in July, 2003, to attack one of his enemies, Professor Liu Bing of Tsinghua University.

Even though Fang shows off his “American biochemistry doctorate” credential constantly in China, his science writings could be about anything but biochemistry. The fact is, Fang’s writings cover a wide range of subjects, from mathematics to physics, from “biomedicine” to TCM, from history of sciences to history of U. S. presidents. Of course, Fang HAS TO plagiarize to write these articles.

In January, 2008, Fang plagiarized Dr. Stan Braude of Washington University to write his The Predicted Animals. The case was discovered in late 2010, and became the first case handled by an Academic Misconduct Assessment Panel organized by AIR-China[26]. It was, to my knowledge, the first plagiarism case handled by an independent panel according to a published protocol in China’s history. So far, Fang has been convicted five times on five different plagiarism cases by five different panels[27].

In May, 2008, after Wenchuan earthquake, Fang immediately pretended to be a seismologist, and began to preach the unpredictability of earthquakes. It was found out later, that two of his seismological writings were based on Dr. Mark Buchanan’s book, Ubiquity: The Physics Of Complex Systems, and one of them was almost entirely verbatim translated from the book. (The story will be told in detail later.)

Fang’s plagiarism activity continues till today. In 2012 alone, Fang published at least 9 plagiarized articles in his column in Xinhua Daily Telegraph, the only official outlet currently available to him. Of course, the newspaper is a subsidiary branch of Xinhua News Agency, where Fang’s wife Liu Juhua works as a chief reporter. The strange thing is, during that period, I, as well as other Chinese scholars, was sending open and private letters to the editor of the newspaper, reporting Fang’s plagiarism, but Fang kept plagiarizing. It is the most convincing evidence showing that Fang could not do his science writing job without stealing from other people. (The stories will be told in detail later.)

6. An unprecedented plagiarizer

So far, 98 articles of Fang’s containing plagiarism have been identified and made public, and except for a few cases, Fang has never defended himself by direct refutation. Among the 98 cases, more than 60% of them involved in translating English articles into Chinese and publishing them as his own properties. The victims of Fang’s plagiarism are located in four continents, America, Europe, Australia, and Asia. These victims include renowned scholars such as Drs. Ernst Mayr and Stephen Jay Gould, anonymous science writers, such as Wikipedia contributors, and Fang’s own professor and followers. In other words, anyone could be Fang’s victim, or Fang steals from everyone! (See figure below).



Unlike plagiarizers recently found in the West, who normally steal only phases or sentences, at most paragraphs or main ideas[28], Fang’s stealing has been comprehensive and exhaustive: from wordings to ideas, from arguments to examples, even article structures could be plagiarized by him. Generally speaking, the minimum level of Fang’s plagiarism are stealing the core ideas of the victim’s, and more likely, his entire articles are written by translation or “paraphrasing,” of course without attribution.

Another feature of Fang’s plagiarism is that more than three quarters of Fang’s stolen articles have been published in print media, so it is very clear that Fang’s stealing has been for economic gains[29]. Since Fang recycles his old articles periodically, i. e. publishing each of his articles multiple times, sometimes as many as 6 times in less than 10 years[30], I estimate that Fang has published plagiarized articles at least 300 times, more than enough for 4 books. Think about how much money he could have made by stealing had he been as popular as Isaac Asimov[31]!



Someone might have wondered why Fang couldn’t write his articles like western science journalists by giving citations, attributions, and acknowledgments? There are at least two reasons which prohibit Fang from doing that. First, Fang wants to pretend to be omniscient and omnipotent, as he repeated explains to Chinese people, his pen name indicates that he is a person who is good at both science and humanities[32]. The reason for Fang’s pretentiousness is because he has been highly expected by his family and hometown people since his childhood[33], and he also wants his followers to follow him blindly, pretty much like cult members following their leader. Therefore, Fang is both mentally and physically (practically) incapable of acknowledging the fact that he is merely a translator or interpreter.

Second, due to his intelligence and education, Fang has no abilities of reiterating a science idea or story based upon his own comprehension. So, in most cases, he HAS TO tell a science idea or story based upon what the idea or story has been narrated by other people, otherwise, he would make a complete fool of himself[34]. This fact alone prevents Fang from acknowledging his sources, because doing so would be equivalent to a thief telling people where he stole his goods from. In other words, Fang has no other ways to perform his science writing job other than the way in which he has been doing.

Not Just a Plagiarizer

According to Fang, his only income source is his book royalties and article remunerations[29]. So far, Fang has published about twenty books. The fact is, just like recycling his own articles, Fang recycles his books by re-publishing an old book with a new title and new cover, or breaking up a few old books and re-organize them into “new” books. For example, in 2004, Fang took out his humanities and historical essays from his Fangzhou Online, and published them through one of his hometown publishers, then he had a “new” book[35]. And that book would be an integral part of another book published in 2012[36]. The fact is, many of these repeatedly published “humanities and historical essays” had been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, plagiarism, but Fang keeps publishing them as many times as he can. Not only that. Fang’s article attacking Professor Yu Ying-shih of Princeton University had been panned by Professor Fu Jie of Fudan University in 1999, therefore Fang knew its fallacy and worthlessness, but that fact couldn’t stop him recycling the garbage[37].

In 2005, Children's Publishing House published Fang’s Genes On Dining Tables. Two years later, the same book was published again, under the title of Food Transgenic, with a completely different cover.


Turning a booklet into two masterpieces
Left: The cover of Fang’s Genes On Dining Tables, published in 2005; Right: The cover of Fang’s Food Transgenic, published in 2007. Both books were published by the same publisher, with basically the same contents.


Of course Fang has other tricks to “write” books and to fool his readers, and one of them is by robbing, literally. In Fang’s Criticism of Traditional Chinese Medicine, not only there are articles he plagiarized from other people, articles he was publishing at the same time in another book, and images he pirated from the internet, there are also articles under other scholars’ names, and these articles were inserted into his book as an “appendix,” which is more than one quarter of the total pages of the book[38].

One prominent feature of Fang’s books is that they contain a large number of figures and images. For example, there are more figures and images than pages in Fang’s Approaching to Science with Fang Zhouzi, published in 2007, and almost none of these figures and images have copyright authorization or source acknowledgment. In early 2011, some people publicly accused Fang of piracy, and Fang defended himself this way:

“Fang experts spread rumors that all of the 380 figures in Approaching to Science with Fang Zhouzi were pirated. Actually, some of them were figures drawn by myself (for example, p.156) or photos taken by myself (for example, p.143), some are in public domain, some are used for the purpose of introducing other people’s research results, belonging to fair use. If there are oversights and copyright owners’ protests, we’ll make adjustment in this July when the book goes to reprint.”[39]

The fact is, there are only one drawing on page 156 and two images on page 143 in that book, therefore the rest 377 figures and images, more than 99% of total, were all stolen or robbed, and Fang had the courage to accuse other people of “spreading rumors.” Another fact is, among the 93 articles in the book, at least 16 of them are plagiarism, and most copyrighted images were used not for “introducing other people’s research results.”

Also, according to U. S. copyright law, 17 USC § 107, to determine whether a use of copyrighted work without permission is fair or not, depends on four considerations, and among them are:

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;……

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole;……


Since all of Fang’s science writings are for the purpose of his personal gain, Fang has no right to fair use at all. On the other hand, fair use is only granted to partial use of a work, and a figure or an image is an intact work, so basically there is no such a thing as fair use of them. In other words, Fang has violated U. S. copyright law, as well as The Universal Copyright Convention, hundreds, or even more than a thousand, times. Considering Fang currently has three outstanding libel court judgments against him, and he is still refusing to comply with these court orders[40], therefore, the inaugural John Maddox Prize winner is basically a transnational criminal!


The cover of Approaching to Science with Fang Zhouzi is a composite of multiple stolen images
Left: The cover of Fang’s book;
Right: upper: Greg Martin’s Glacial vs Infierno; lower: GettyImage file #dv528005 (Note: Fang flipped the polar bear image horizontally before using it, obviously trying to hide his piracy.)



Sir John E. Sulston was used by Fang Zhouzi for profit
Left: Image of Sir John E. Sulston in Fang’s book, page 181;
Right: The original image from [www.nobelprize.org], which was copyrighted.



Mr. James Reston was used by Fang to make a profit
Left: Image and legend of James Reston in Fang’s Criticism of Traditional Chinese Medicine, page 50;
Right: the original image, copyrighted by G. Paul Bishop.



Daniel Boone became Fang’s commercial product
Left: Image and legend of Daniel Boone in Fang’s Criticism of Traditional Chinese Medicine, page 131;
Right: the original image of Daniel Boone, copyrighted by Archiving Early America website.





More than a plagiarizer

Fang’s uniqueness among the plagiarizers in the world is not limited to the length of his stealing history, the quantity of his theft, the boldness of his violation. No. If Fang was a pure thief, there might not have been so many people who care about his stealing. As a matter of fact, except for Dr. Robert Root-Bernstein, none of the victims of Fang’s plagiarism have stood up for their right. So why do we, the “Fang experts,” care? Because plagiarism is not only Fang’s mean of subsistence, but also his road to fame, and on his way to fame, Fang vents his evilness.

According to Fang, the frauds he busted the most is plagiarism[41]. Indeed, accusing other people of plagiarism has been the recurrent theme in Fang’s so called “standing up for science” that Nature listed it as one of Fang’s major achievements[42]. The fact is, even though making plagiarism accusations frequently, Fang rarely provide convincing evidence to support his accusations. In December, 2000, Fang published an articles accusing Professor Yang Jingan of Hefei University of Technology of plagiarism, and he actually called it “the boldest academic plagiarism.”[43] However, Fang showed only 97 English words which were supposedly plagiarized. In comparison, in one of his 2002 articles, Misreading of IQ, Fang plagiarized more than 3,000 English words, and he has published that stolen article at least 5 times so far. Apparently, Fang is much bolder than the boldest!

There are several reasons why Fang was so fond of busting other people’s plagiarism. The first one is, as mentioned above, in Chinese tradition, plagiarism was considered one of the most serious and humiliating crimes an intellectual or scholar could commit. In other words, once a scholar is accused, let alone convicted, of plagiarism, he would be utterly discredited. Of course Fang wants to use this lethal weapon to destroy his enemies. That’s why Fang wants to frame Dr. Wu Bolin for plagiarism[44]. That’s why Fang wants to frame Professor Liu Bing for plagiarism (Part VII of this letter). That’s why Fang wants to frame Dr. Sun Haifeng for plagiarism (Part XIV of this letter). On the other hand, as mentioned above also, Fang believes every Chinese people has the original sin of plagiarism, the only difference is how skillful they are. That belief made Fang really confident that he is invincible in this area.

Another reason why Fang loves to bust plagiarism cases so much is because Fang wants to show off himself. The rule of thumb is, as I summed up two years ago, if Fang is accusing a person or entity of plagiarism, the accused must be his personal enemy, otherwise the victim is most likely himself[45]. The reason for that is, Fang takes every opportunity to promote himself, and since “Plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery,” Fang, who is as shrewd as the merchant of Venice, certainly don’t want to pass up the opportunity. In fact, whenever he has a chance, he would shout as loud as possible, so the whole world would know that his “famous essays” had been plagiarized[46].

However, the most important reason why Fang is so keen on wielding the big stick of plagiarism is for the purpose of hiding his own plagiarism. This is Fang’s logic: in December, 2008, when refuting a plagiarism allegation against him, Fang wrote:

“If [one writes articles] by translating or compiling articles from foreign countries without attribution, and publishes them as his own articles, that’s plagiarism, which has been exposed many times on the New Threads, how could I do such a thing?”[47]

In March, 2010, when refuting yet another plagiarism allegation against him, Fang wrote:

“I’m regarded as ‘academic fraud buster,’ exposing other people’s plagiarism all the time, if I do the dirty deed myself, I should be classified as one of the most despicable people. [How could I do it?]”[48]

Well, let’s watch this most despicable literary thief in action. Stay tuned.


Notes

[1] For example, on August 26, 2010, Fang was interviewed by sina.com, in which Fang claimed that in the past ten years, he normally busts about 100 frauds per year. (Original Chinese: “在打假的十年中,基本上一年一百起左右。” He also claimed that “I have not made fundamental mistakes in the fights which involved me directly.” (Original Chinese: “由我本人亲自打的假,根本上出错的没有,细节有错的有过,一旦发现马上澄清、更正。”) (See: book.sina.com.cn. Dialogue to Fang Zhouzi: fight frauds for ten years, nearly flawless. 《对话方舟子:十年打假几乎无失手》).

[2] My original challenge was made in an article, Is Zhouzi a Success or a Failure? (《方舟子到底是“成功”了,还是失败了?》), written on Jan. 22, 2011. I sent the challenge via email to Fang on the same day (Beijing Time Jan. 23, 2011.) Original Chinese: “亦明兄向方斗士提出这样的挑战:你如果能够举出一百个‘打对了’的案例(不足被打案例总数的十分之一),亦明兄不仅从此不再研究方学,我还要把自己花费了三年心血写成的方学著作付之一炬。” (See: Yi Ming. 27 Challenges to Fang Zhouzi. 《亦明向方舟子发出的27份挑战书》).

[3] There were several circumstances which revealed Fang’s Achilles' Heel. See the Preface of Fangzhou Onlie by Yi Ming. (亦明:《〈方舟子在骗〉序》).

[4] See the Preface of Chronicle and Demonstration of Fang Zhouzi’s Plagiarism and Copyright Infringement. (亦明:《〈方舟子抄袭剽窃年谱〉序》).

[5] Fang’s original Chinese: “上了初中,文学才能开始显露,作文每每被当作范文,还曾经入选《中学生文选》,供各地的小朋友考试抄袭用。” (See: Fang Zhouzi. My Ideal. Written on Sept. 18, 1993.方舟子:《我的理想》).

[6] Fang’s original Chinese: “我们从小就在老师指导下学习如何背下范文应付作文考试,养成了抄袭的习惯。” (See: Fang Zhouzi. All Papers in the World Are Plagiarism. The Economic Observer, Feb. 18, 2008. 方舟子:《天下论文一大抄》, 2008年2月18日《经济观察报》).

[7] Even during 1980s, plagiarism was considered serious offense in Chinese schools. “Plagiarizing during an exam” (“打小抄”) was considered an insulting label.

[8] Original Chinese: “其浑而类者少,窃取他书以合之者多,凡《孟》《管》辈数家,皆见剽窃。” (柳宗元:《辩文子》); “惟古於词必己出,降而不能乃剽贼。” (韩愈:《南阳樊绍述墓志铭》). See: Etymological Dictionary (Ci Yuan). Commercial Press, Beijing, 1997. p197. (《辞源》,商务印书馆1997年版197页).

[9] Hu Shi left many manuscripts on the case, for example, see The Complete Works of Hu Shi, Volumes 14-17.

[10] Lynch, J. 2002. The Perfectly Acceptable Practice of Literary Theft: Plagiarism, Copyright, and the Eighteenth Century. Colonial Williamsburg: The Journal of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation 24, no. 4 (Winter 2002–3), pp. 51–54. (Note: the citation is based on the author’s own CV. No such an article could be found on the journal’s website.)

[11] The fact is well known in China. Even Fang himself admitted that. On Jan. 8, 2011, Fang wrote: “I heard that the leaders of the county told the visitors: our Yunxiao has three specialty products: loquat, fake cigarettes, and Fang Zhouzi.” (Original Chinese: “据说县领导是这么向来宾介绍的:我们云霄有三样特产,枇杷、假烟、方舟子。” See: 2011-1-8 17:38).

[12] Fang’s original Chinese: “本人就是个文抄公”. (See: Fang Zhouzi. All Female Writers in the World Are Plagiarists. Written on Oct. 17, 1995. 方舟子:《天下文女一大抄》).

[13] See: Fang Zhouzi. About Fang Zhouzi.

[14] Original Chinese: 《眼蝶标本》.

[15] Fang’s original Chinese: “记得读到的第一首朦胧诗是北岛的短诗‘一朵迷路的蒲公英’,因为短,所以批判文章全诗照录。读完的几天后制作眼蝶标本〔其翅膀有花纹如眼〕,竟然浮想联翩,也依样写道‘一只迷路的小眼蝶’〔几年后重写此诗,自然不露模仿痕迹了〕。” (See: Fang Zhouzi. My Ideal. Written on Sept. 18, 1993.方舟子:《我的理想》).

[16] Yi Ming. Fang Zhouzi: A Deformed Talent. pp.89-94. Chapter 8, What Kind of Poet Fang Was? 亦明:《文史畸才方舟子》第八章《方舟子是什么样的诗人?》,89-94页。

[17] Fang’s original Chinese: “根据我在国内外青年诗坛蒙混多年的经验,写诗另有一个万无一失的绝招。古人云,写诗要句句甚至字字有出处,那是写古诗,写新诗也是可以照办的嘛。不过这出处要弄得让人不知有出处,那才叫水平。” (See: Fang Zhouzi. An Unique Skill of Writing Poems to Deceive the World. Written on Oct. 24, 1995. 方舟子:《写诗蒙世绝招》).

[18] Yi Ming. Fang Zhouzi: A Deformed Talent. pp.86-88. Chapter 7, Why Did Fang Zhouzi Want to Be a Poet? 亦明:《文史畸才方舟子》第七章《方舟子为什么要当诗人?》,86-88页。

[19] Yi Ming. Fang Zhouzi: A Deformed Talent. pp.157-167. Chapter 11, Nonsense Talking of Ming History. 亦明:《文史畸才方舟子》第十一章《货真价实的“乱侃明史”》,157-167页。

[20] Original Chinese: 《功到雄奇即罪名》.

[21] Yi Ming. Fang Zhouzi: A Deformed Talent. pp.181-227. Chapter 12, Analysis of Fang’s The Feat Was Too Great It Became a Crime. 亦明:《文史畸才方舟子》第十二章《情到滥发即荒唐——评方舟子〈功到雄奇即罪名〉》,181-227页。

[22] The article has appeared in Fang’s Fangzhou Online (《方舟在线》,2000), Jiang Shan Wu Xian (《江山无限》,2004), and My Two World (《我的两个世界》,2012).

[23] Fang’s original Chinese: “我认为,是否具有思想性,是区分所谓‘高级科普’和‘普通科普’的一条标准。” (Fang Zhouzi. Postscript of New Chapter of Evolution Theory. XYS20010414. 方舟子:《〈进化新篇章〉后记》,XYS20010414).

[24] Yi Ming. Fang Zhouzi: A SciFool Writer. Chapter 8. An Investigation on Popular Science Writer Fang Zhouzi. pp.99-102. 亦明:《科唬作家方舟子》第八章《“科普作家方舟子”考》,99-102页。

[25] Ge Xin. An Investigation on Fang Zhouzi’s plagiarism of Yi Hua’s Article, The Worship of Ginseng. Legal Weekly, April 13, 2011. 葛莘:《方舟子抄袭易华〈人参崇拜〉一文的考证》.

[26] See: AIR-China. Special Collections of Fang Zhouzi’s Plagiairsm Cases. Archives of Case No. 1. 《方舟子抄袭剽窃专辑001号案档案》.

[27] The Academic Misconduct Assessment Panels: The Verdicts.

[28] Cook, Patricia. Names of Famous Plagiarists Might Surprise You. Yahoo! Voices, Nov 16, 2010. Bailey, Jonathan. 5 Famous Plagiarists: Where Are They Now? Plagiarism Today, August 21, 2012.

[29] Fang has repeatedly said that his only income sources are book royalties and article remunerations. For example, in an article published in August, 2010, in Southern Weekly, there is a sentence: “Fang doesn’t mind talking about his income sources. Besides the book royalties, all the others are from the article remunerations.” (Original Chinese: “方舟子并不讳言他的收入来源。除了写书带来的版税,其他就是他给报刊写文章赚取的稿费。” See: Qi Jielun. Fang Zhouzi Has Fought Frauds for Ten Years. Southern Weekly, 2010 (29). 齐介仑:《方舟子十年打假路》,《南都周刊》2010年第29期).

[30] For example, Fang’s EAT LESS, LIVE LONGER was first published in Globe magazine and Disillusionment of Longevity in 2002, it appeared in Southern Weekend in 2003, in two books in 2007, and in Xinhua Daily Telegraph in 2012.

[31] Since 2008, Fang has tried several times to associate Asimov with him. For example, he said in 2008: “Asimov also engaged in popular science writing after receiving his doctoral degree in biochemistry.” (Original Chinese: “阿西莫夫也是拿了生物化学博士学位后从事科普写作”. (See: Fang Zhouzi Answers Questions by New Century Weekly Reporter about Science Popularization. 《方舟子就科普问题答〈新世纪周刊〉记者问》,XYS20081208).

[32] Original Chinese: “20年前,当他还是一个傍海而居、诗心初萌的闽南少年,就给自己起了‘方舟子’这个笔名,意指驾驶两条船的人,一条是科学,一条是文学。” (See: Zhang Jianfeng. Fang Zhouzi: I Don’t Want to Remain Silent. South Wind, August 27, 2010. 章剑锋:《方舟子:我不愿沉默》,《南风窗》2010年8月27日).

[33] There are many evidences, though circumstantial, supporting the statement. For example, see: Zhou Yangning, et al. The Fang Zhouzi You Don’t Know. Straits News, Feb. 10, 2012. 周杨宁、曾炳光、杨清竹:《你不知道的方舟子》,2012年2月10日《海峡都市报》。

[34] Fang’s science writings have been criticized by many scholars on the internet, even newspapers. For example, just a few days ago, Feb. 22, 2013, Shenzhen City News (《深圳都市报》) published a piece of news, the title was “Nuclear Leak in Union Hospital? Fang Zhouzi Was Joking!”《协和医院核泄漏?方舟子在开玩笑!

[35] The book is Jiang Shan Wu Xian (《江山无限》), published by Fujian People's Publishing House in 2004.

[36] The book is My Two Worlds (《我的两个世界》), published by Baihuazhou Literature and Art Publishing House in 2012.

[37] For detail, see: Yi Ming. Fang Zhouzi: A Deformed Talent. pp.228-267. Chapter 13, Analysis of Fang’s Did Guo Moruo Plagiarize Qian Mu? 亦明:《文史畸才方舟子》第十三章《有文如斯,学术规范不要也罢——评〈郭沫若抄袭钱穆了吗?〉》,228-267页。

[38] Criticism of Traditional Chinese Medicine has 210 pages, the appendix has 56 pages. For detail, see: Yi Ming. The Four Big Secrets of Criticism of Traditional Chinese Medicine: stealing, Lifting, Robbing, and Cheating. 亦明:《〈批评中医〉的四大秘密:偷、盗、抢、骗》.

[39] Fang’s original Chinese: “‘方学家’造谣说《方舟子带你走近科学》一书380余图片全部盗用他人。其实里面一部分是我自己绘制的插图(例如p.156)或拍摄的照片(例如 p.143),一部分是公共领域的图片,一部分是为介绍他人成果使用的论文插图,属合理使用。如果有疏漏,有版权拥有者提出异议的话,将在今年7月再版时更正。” (See: 2011-2-26 15:56).

[40] See: note 36 in Part XII.

[41] On March 24, 2004, Fang was asked by a reporter, “what kind of frauds is your major target? Fang replied: “I counted it a few days ago, by now there are about 300 cases, among them, plagiarism is the most popular category, having 110 cases.” (Original Chinese: “我前几天统计了一下,大概现在有三百例左右,其中最多的是抄袭剽窃这一块有110例”. Transcript of Fang’s Chatting on Sohu.com. 《方舟子3月24日做客搜狐聊天实录(订正版)》,XYS20040324).

[42] In Nature’s editorial, John Maddox prize, it says: “And into that permissive milieu has walked a plethora of opportunists ready to take advantage of the situation with padded CVs, fraudulent and plagiarized articles, bogus medicines and medical procedures carried out without clinical evidence. …In 2000, Shi-min Fang started to expose these escapades in his New Threads website.”

[43] Fang Zhouzi. The Boldest Plagiarism: The Case of Professor Yang Jingan of Hefei University of Technology. XYS20001210. 方舟子:《最大胆的抄袭──合肥工业大学杨敬安教授抄袭案》, XYS20001210.

[44] Fang Zhouzi. The Third Comment on the Fantasized “Human body revolution.” XYS20001204. 方舟子:《三说虚妄的“人体革命”──小报是〈人体革命〉的资料来源》, XYS20001204.

[45] My original Chinese: “本人发现了这样一条规律:如果方舟子扯嗓子指责谁谁剽窃、哪报哪刊发表了剽窃文章,假如被剽对象不是他方舟子本人,则被指控的对象十有八九是方舟子的私敌。” See the Preface of Chronicle and Demonstration of Fang Zhouzi’s Plagiarism and Copyright Infringement. (亦明:《〈方舟子抄袭剽窃年谱〉序》).

[46] On Nov. 25, 2008, Fang published a “Public Display of Plagiarism” on his website, claiming that his “classic,” The Feat Was Too Great It Became a Crime, was plagiarized. (《【剽窃示众】〈袁崇焕传〉:功到雄奇即罪名》).

[47] Fang’s original Chinese: “如果是翻译、编译国外的文章,而不注明,当成自己的原创文章发表,那是剽窃行为,新语丝上揭露过很多,本人岂会去干这种事情?” (See: Fang Zhouzi. About the Rumor and Slander of Eric You XU, a Doctoral Graduate Student of Computer Science at Washington University. XYS20081210. 方舟子:《关于华盛顿大学计算机专业博士生徐宥的造谣诽谤》,XYS20081210).

[48] Fang’s original Chinese: “我被人称为‘学术打假人士’,整天揭发别人抄袭,如果自己也干抄袭的勾当,这样的‘人’是该被分到最卑劣的一群里头去的。” (See: Fang Zhouzi. Scientific Squirrel Club Became Rumor Club. XYS20100323. 方舟子:《“科学松鼠会”成了造谣会》, XYS20100323).



被编辑2次。最后被亦明编辑于08/05/2013 07:17AM。
附件:
打开 | 下载 - Shamelessness shouldn\'t be anyone\'s Nature XV.pdf (1.09 MB)
主题 发布者 已发表

Shamelessness Shouldn’t Be Anyone’s Nature ──An Open Letter to Nature (Part I) (6551 查看) 附件

亦明 November 09, 2012 08:46AM

Part II: Shameless “standing-up” (3944 查看) 附件

亦明 November 09, 2012 12:05PM

Part III: Shameless make-up (4369 查看) 附件

亦明 November 11, 2012 10:06PM

Part IV: Fact distortion and mess-up (3516 查看) 附件

亦明 November 13, 2012 11:57PM

Part V: Shameless, fraudulent, and malicious fighter (5093 查看) 附件

亦明 November 18, 2012 12:10PM

Part VI: A fake scientist’s fight against science (4173 查看) 附件

亦明 November 23, 2012 06:28AM

Part VII: A fraudulent fighter’s fight for fraud (4001 查看) 附件

亦明 November 28, 2012 09:46AM

Part VIII: A fighting dog for commercial and political forces (3483 查看) 附件

亦明 December 03, 2012 05:21PM

Part IX: An evil villain's fight for his career (3956 查看) 附件

亦明 December 09, 2012 05:36PM

Part X: A congenital liar has Nature as his amplifier (3465 查看) 附件

亦明 December 16, 2012 11:51AM

Part XI: Fang’s Law (4823 查看) 附件

亦明 January 29, 2013 12:16AM

Part XII: Fang’s Law-II (4696 查看) 附件

亦明 February 04, 2013 10:40AM

Part XIII: A Thief Couple (4557 查看) 附件

亦明 February 10, 2013 06:14PM

Part XIV: A 24K Pure Evil (4544 查看) 附件

亦明 February 17, 2013 07:28PM

Part XV: An Unprecedented Professional Literary Thief (4616 查看) 附件

亦明 February 24, 2013 08:00PM

Part XVI: The Science Case (2716 查看) 附件

亦明 March 03, 2013 07:31PM

Part XVII: The Nature-Science Case (3194 查看) 附件

亦明 March 10, 2013 06:41PM

Part XVIII: The Harvard Case (I) (3194 查看) 附件

亦明 March 17, 2013 06:36PM

Part XIX: The Harvard Case (II) (4343 查看) 附件

亦明 March 24, 2013 02:40PM

Part XX: The Longevity Case (6929 查看) 附件

亦明 March 31, 2013 03:55PM

Part XXI: The Naked Mole-Rat Case (10786 查看) 附件

亦明 April 07, 2013 06:05PM



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.