欢迎! 登陆 注册

高级搜索

Part XLVI: The Hanly War (VII): The Pseudoscholar_3 (961 查看)

January 28, 2015 12:26PM
Fang’s Third Attempt

On January 30, 2012, two days after posting his “Madical analysis,” Fang published his The Third Analysis of the Myth about Han Han’s Seeing a Doctor, which elevated Fang’s stupidity, his ignorance, his malice, and his evilness to a new level.

1. School Boarding Custom

In the article, Fang pointed out four “suspicious points,” which, in Fang’s dictionary, are equivalent to “evidence.” The first one is that in Seeing a Doctor, Han Han said he slept in the lower part of a bunk bed in his dormitory; however, in a small post in 2006, Han Han said that when he was at school, he slept in the upper bed. So Fang’s “question” was:

“Why did Han Han in a self-claimed documentary essay about seeing a doctor want to change his bed? Are there any necessities for that?”[110]

Although it seems that there is no one in the world who could understand the significance of Fang’s questions, the fact is, as pointed out by many internet users, that it is the custom in the boarding schools in Shanghai to shift the positions of their beds regularly. Here is Mr. Wang Jiamin’s refutation:

“First of all, in the boarding high school in Shanghai (I myself studied in a boarding high school in Shanghai), it is very normal to change the beds; many people have slept in both upper and lower beds. Secondly, a literary writing does not equal to reality, even if in a literary writing I said I slept in a middle bed, so what? Therefore, this question is very absurd.”[111]

Obviously, Mr. Wang didn’t understand the undertone in Fang’s question: because he was unable to make use of the “discovery” to frame Han Han, he was actually soliciting hypotheses from his followers by asking the question. As a matter of fact, a Weibo user had already asked Fang the following questions three days earlier:

“Begging Teacher Fang’s explanation: Han Han’s father stayed in Han Han’s school for only one week, how come he knew the roommate who slept in the upper bunk wore his underwear for two weeks? I am not one of those whom you call the swearing troopers, I am only using common sense to understand!”[112]

Do you think the fraudulent fraud fighter will ever respond to a question like that?

What’s even funnier is, just two days before Fang raised the issue, Mr. Wang Jiamin posted an old essay by one of Han Han’s roommates in his high school, Mr. Jin Danhua (金丹华), published in 2000, which says that Han Han actually slept in a lower bed[113]. Therefore, Fang’s entire argument was not only absurd and stupid, but also invalid. And the very fact that Fang persistently pursued the issue indicates not only his maliciousness, but also his desperation.

As a matter of fact, before Fang posted his “Third Analysis,” Mr. Jin had posted several messages to testify that many of Han Han’s writings were written while he was in high school. Here is one of them:

“Let me talk something about Han Han’s extraordinary writing ability. When we were in the freshman class in high school, Han Han generally won’t participate in the evening self-studies, besides sneaking out with us to eat something like fried dumplings, most of the times he went to the Kentucky Fried Chicken on the Eastern Zhongshan Road in Songjiang to write, and after everyone went back to bedroom, one of our obligatory courses was to read the manuscript he had just written, and usually we laughed a lot, and many articles in the Freezing [one of Han Han’s essay collections] were written this way.”[114]

Of course, the fraudulent fraud fighter would never be able to see the evidence like that.

2. Chinese Language

Fang’s second argument was based on the following paragraph in Seeing a Doctor:

“She looked at the card, knew my name is ‘Han Han,’ but she didn’t know how to pronounce the name in Mandarin, so she closed her eyes and read aloud: ‘Yuan Han!’ There is a book written by Sigmund Freud, The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, in which it says that the distorting of names amounts to an insult when done intentionally. I was not sure she mispronounced my name on purpose, therefore had no reason to be upset, so I endured my itching and admitted that I was ‘Yuan Han.’”[115]

Here is Fang’s “analysis”:

“According to the internet users in Jinshan, Shanghai, the Jinshan dialect indeed pronounces ‘Han’ as ‘Yuan.’ In a big hospital in Shanghai in 1999, there were still doctors who were unable to speak good Mandarin, pronounce ‘Han’ correctly? Why did Han Han feel insulted when his name pronounced ‘Yuan Han’? It would be understandable if ‘Han Renjun’ was mispronounced as ‘Yuan Renjun’ [猿人君, Mr. Ape-Man], and Han Renjun felt insulted.”[116]

The issue was actually started by that brain damage expert Hate to Idle three days earlier. In his “Analysis 5” he wrote:

“‘She looked at the card, knew my name is “Han Han,” but she didn’t know how to pronounce the name in Mandarin.’ In nowadays when TV has been so popular, it is impossible for a doctor, who must have graduated from a medical school, no matter she is a Yunnanese or Cantonese, to be unable to pronounce Han Han in Mandarin. Therefore, it looks like a hospital in the old time.”[117]

One day later, a Zhang Xiaolong picked up the issue:

“There is a detail in Seeing a Doctor which is against common sense. ‘The female doctor pronounced Han Han as Yuan Han.’ The entry level to the big hospitals in Shanghai is pretty high; it is very difficult to imagine that those who had received formal education couldn’t pronounce Han Han in Mandarin. Those doctors who understood dialects only were more likely in the small local hospitals. In Shanghai dialect, both Hans pronounced the same, unrelated to Yuan at all.”[118]

To which, Fang responded:

“I was puzzled by it also. Did he see the doctor outside of Shanghai?”[118]

And then, the Fangangsters immediately started to solve their master’s puzzlement. On the next day, Jan. 29, 2012, a “Teacher Fan Run Run” claimed that he had solved the puzzle: because the traditional Chinese character 韓 (Han Han’s surname) resembles, sort of, character 轅 (yuán, shafts of a horse carriage), and Yuan Ren sounds the same as “ape-man” (猿人, yuán rén), so the person felt insulted - hence the author of the essay - was Han Han’s father Han Renjun, not Han Han[119]. And Fang stole the argument entirely.

The problem is, it is really far-fetched to say that the doctor who didn’t know how to pronounce the simplified character 韩 (hán) could confuse it with the traditional Chinese character轅 (yuán), because, first of all, the traditional Chinese character system had been abolished in mainland China since 1950s; and secondly, as some internet users pointed out, the traditional Chinese character轅, although a little similar to traditional Chinese character韓 (hán), is not similar to the latter’s simplified counterpart at all[120].


Selective believing
Fang believes that since the traditional Chinese character hán looks a little similar to the traditional Chinese character yuán, therefore the doctor in Han Han’s essay confused the simplified Chinese character hán as the traditional Chinese character yuán (pointed by the blue double-head arrow).


On the other hand, as many people, including Fang’s supporters, had confirmed that in Jinshan dialect, which is a branch of Shanghainese, Han is indeed pronounced as Yuan[121]. Also, many Shanghainese do pronounce the different characters in a word in a mixed way: combined dialect with Mandarin[122], and it is common in the local burlesques the actors mimic the funny way of pronunciation[123]. Therefore, Han Han was more likely doing the same in his essay –he was just trying to be funny. Also, it was Fang who said that Han Han felt insulted by the mispronunciation – Han Han didn’t say that.

3. Chinese Physicians’ Little Trick

The third “suspicious point” Fang found in Han Han’s essay was in the following sentence:

“I used to see an intern doctor just fresh out of college. The little girl who had just become a doctor cared about her face very much, writing the characters carefully, when misspelt, she would use a rubber moistened with mouth water to erase……”[124]

Here is Fang’s comment:

“In the 90s of the last century, there were still doctors who were using a rubber moistened with mouth water to erase miswritten characters? Isn’t it something happened a long time ago?”[125]

Again, Fang’s argument was stolen from other people. Two hours before Fang posted his “Third Analysis,” an Weibo user who called herself “Kaerna” (喀迩娜, Kā ěr nà), who pretended to be a “medical worker” but her claim has never been verified, posted an article online, entitled Questioning Seeing a Doctor from the Perspective of Medical and Healthcare Professionals. In the article, this medical worker made the following comment on Han Han’s above passage:

“Fuck! I cannot help cursing. Besides those semi-illiterates who were worse than the worst and enrolled into the worker-peasant-soldier medical school directly during the Cultural Revolution, and besides those who became a doctor directly from a nurse or a technician during the Cultural Revolution, are there any other explanations? Which doctor who graduated in the 1990s and assigned to a hospital erases his/her miswritten case report with a rubber moistened with water like a pupil, rather than crosses the mistake and continues? Stand out and I’ll find two migrant workers to kill you with iron hammers so that you won’t be able to lose the face of China’s physicians!”[126]

The dubious medical worker notified Fang at the same time she posted her article; however, it took Fang nearly 24 hours to issue his recommendation, apparently trying to leave some time for his stealing:

“A doctor’s professional interpretation of Han Han’s Seeing a Doctor, even better than what I wrote, recommend. After reading this interpretation, and combined with my previous analyses, it should be even clearer that the author of Seeing a Doctor cannot be Han Han. The leaders of the temporizers Liu Ge and Lin Chufang, please read.”[127]

Obviously, neither the fake medical worker nor the fake biomedical expert knew that Chinese government had explicitly prohibited the doctors from altering the medical documents since the 1980s[128], so it has been a common practice among the physicians to “use a rubber moistened with mouth water to erase miswritten characters” to save time. Here is a comment on Fang’s recommendation:

“Based on what I know, in the 1990s, doctors who wrote case report not only used rubber moistened with mouth water to erase, but also used razor to scrape, used tape to stick off. These were the little basic skills for the doctors. A case history is not allowed to be altered, once a few characters are miswritten, it is too much trouble to rewrite it, so a doctor has to use his special skill to fix it! Fang is obviously a layman!”[129]

4. China’s Hospitals

Fang’s last “suspicious point” in his “third analysis” was found in the following sentences in Seeing a Doctor:

“I walked out of the surgery department, and heard a doctor in the internal medicine department was calling a patient stupid. That patient responded timidly: ‘You, here, on the wall, it writes ‘Please use: Thanks, Goodbye, I’m Sorry’……”[130]

Fang’s comment:

“In a big hospital in Shanghai in 1999, the polite language slogans were still posted on the wall? It sounds like the movement of ‘five stresses, four points of beauty and three loves’ in the early 1980s.”[131]

Just like the previous ones, Fang’s this argument was stolen from one his followers. Three days earlier, that Hate to Idle wrote in his “Analysis 6”:

“‘I walked out of the surgery department, and heard a doctor in the internal medicine department was calling a patient stupid.’ A doctor dared to scold a patient? It is impossible in a hospital with a standard management. The polite languages for the pupils were written on the wall, the hospitals have passed that age a long time ago, so it was likely a hospital in the ancient past.”[132]

So, whether this argument is valid? Here is a refutation by Mr. Wang Jiamin:

“In 2009, due to inflammation of my tonsils, I had a 40-degree fever, so I went to Shanghai Putuo People’s Hospital to get intravenous drip. I remember clearly I saw posters on the wall with the polite languages like ‘Hello, Thanks, Goodbye.’ May I ask Fang Zhouzi, how did you draw the god-like conclusion that in the 90s of the last century Shanghai’s hospitals won’t post polite language posters?”[133]
  
Of course the John Maddox Prize winner immediately adopted his “last strategy.” As a matter of fact, Mr. Wang Jiamin wrote three articles refuting every thread of Fang’s arguments in his first three fraudulent analyses of Han Han’s Seeing a Doctor, and these articles were collectively published on the Reading Channel of the NetEase website on Jan. 30, 2012, therefore were widely read[134]. And till this day, Fang is still pretending that these articles don’t exist. Here are two comments by the internet users on Mr. Wang’s last article in the series:

“Fang Zhouzi doesn’t care about the explanations at all, what he hopes is that in the continuous explanations, you will make new typos or create new conflicts which would let him question continuously and cyclically. If you make ten explanations in which there is only one tiny problem, he will grab that problem tightly and ignore the rest. By doing so, he is giving his audience a misimpression that the other side has been making mistakes all along. To fight against him, one needs to have a thick facial skin, and inexhaustible physical and mental energies. The onlookers who should have known that have known it long ago. It’s better to ignore him.”[135]

“After reading The Third Analysis of the Myth about Han Han’s Seeing a Doctor, I left a message on Fang’s notebook: ‘to be honest, i'm very disappointed by this meaningless ‘analysis’. god bless you and good luck!’ The level of his so called questioning is so low that I am shocked.”[136]



Fang Zhouzi is Fangally done!
On Jan. 30, 2012, two hours after Fang posted his The Third Analysis of the Myth about Han Han’s Seeing a Doctor online, Mr. Wang Jiamin posted his refutation entitled: Fang Zhouzi Is Finished. Please note that Mr. Wang played a homophonic trick on Fang’s Chinese penname: he cut character Fang’s head off (方becomes万), took character Zhou’s head and genital away (舟becomes丹), and striped character Zi’s waist belt off (子becomes了), then the three characters Fāng zhōu zi (方舟子, the big black characters in the above image) become Wàn dānle (万丹了, the big red characters), which sounds similar to the phrase Wán dànle (完蛋了), meaning “be done for; be finished/destroyed; gone for the dogs”[137]. And indeed, by the end of January 2012, Fang’s fate had already been doomed.


Fang’s Final Push

1. A Prelude

On Jan. 29, 2012, Mr. Han Renjun posted the images of two of Han Han’s letters to him while he was in the Songjiang No. 2 High School[138]. In one letter, Han Han asked his father to buy 7 rare ancient books for him; in the other, Han Han talked about the missing letter from Mengya magazine informing him that he was selected to participate in the second round of the New Concept Writing Competition. Obviously, Mr. Han Renjun was trying to use the material evidence to refute Fang’s allegations. It took Fang 35 hours to falsify these letters:

“Let all of us study: The Two Weird Family Letters from Han Han. [t.cn]”[139]

“Let’s be Sherlock Holmes together: in the second photo, do the characters on the back of the envelope look like written on the top of the postmarks (normally, the postmarks should be on the top of the characters)? The writing format: the character ‘家’ in the first line, the character ‘机’ in the fourth line, and the last character ‘起,’ don’t they look like being written along the line where the envelope was ripped off? In other words, these characters were written later on an old envelope to prove that the envelope and the letter are the same set. More interesting contents in The Two Weird Family Letters from Han Han. [t.cn]”[140]



Sherlock Holmes Fang - “The leading myth-buster in China”
Fang Zhouzi, praised by the fake American Ph. D. Albert Yuan as “the leading myth-buster in China,” solved another mystery: He “demonstrated” that the characters on the back of an envelope were written by Han Han 13 years after the letter was sent out in 1999, because according to him, the characters were written on the top of the postmarks (pointed by the red arrowheads), and the 3 characters to the right (marked by the red ovals) were written right along the line where the envelope was ripped off. For the refutations of Fang’s incriminatory analysis, see[141].


And in a few days, Fang would use the same evil “analysis” to falsify another piece of crucial evidence presented by Han Han’s father.

2. The Medical Record

In the midnight of Feb. 2, 2012, Mr. Han Renjun posted the following message along with the medical record of Han Han’s visit to the hospital:

Seeing a Doctor was a literary work written by Han Han based on his personal experience plus some fabrications. In the same year it was written, the Selected Novels magazine published it in their Short Stories section. Seeing that someone is trying really hard to find out things like which hospital Han Han went and whether Han Han had indeed suffered from scabies, I’d better post the medical record here. Even if Han Han didn’t go to any hospitals, he should still be allowed to make up a story as he wishes. It is really wearing to respond to the various intentional misleading incriminations, and I’ll refrain myself from talking about it anymore.”[142]


The medical record
In the early morning of Feb. 3, 2012, Mr. Han Renjun, Han Han’s father, posted on his Weibo Han Han’s medical record, which shows that on Jan. 11, 1999, at 18:50, Han Han went to the Emergency Room of Shanghai’s Jinshan County Central Hospital seeking for treatment of systemic itching. According to the record, the itch was worse at night, and his roommate(s) had the similar symptom, two of the key indications of scabies infection.


Many people thought the record would settle the dispute once for all. For example, Mr. Wang Jiamin wrote:

“The evidence is ironclad. A piece of paper is worth ten thousand words. Mr. Fang Zhouzi, please apologize.”[143]

“I suddenly feel heartbroken when thinking about Han Han’s father who rummaged through boxes and chests to look for evidence during the New Year’s days. He is absolutely a good father, who even has preserved his son’s emergency room record so perfectly.”[143]


Mr. Wang’s anger and sadness were shared by many other people. For example, Dr. Xie Youping, a professor of Law at Fudan University, reposted Mr. Wang’s comment[144]. Dr. Yan Feng, a professor of Chinese at the same university, not only reposted the comment, he also made his own:

“Sad and angry. If every writer is forced to use his own medical records saved in the post dozens of years to prove that the imaginary stories in his fictional writings are not imaginary, then the literature in this country is doomed.”[145]

However, by that time, many people had known Fang a lot better, so they assured each other that the fraudulent fraud fighter Fang would continue his fight. Here are some examples - all posted within 15 minutes of Mr. Han Renjun’s post, in the second half of the night:

“Pig Thigh Fang will say that since you have actually saved the record for the essay, and you are even able to find it, so it must be a fake!”[146]

“Balky Fang will definitely pretend not to see, right, @Fang Zhouzi?”[147]

“As a matter of fact, no matter what evidences you present, Fang Zhouzi will always turn a blind eye to them, and yelling at the same time that they are forged.”[148]

“It will immediately be turned into the evidence by Fang Zhouzi to attack Han Han, if you don’t believe me, let’s wait and see!”[149]

“Fang Zhouzi, you should at least try to be a skeptic with moral, to those items you have questioned but later clarified, please make a formal acknowledgment of the fact. However, based on what I know about you, I am sure you will pretend not to see.”[150]

“Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see Didn’t see”[151]


The most creative comment was made by a person who pretended to be Fang Zhouzi and wrote a comment for him mimicking his “The Two Weird Family Letters from Han Han”:

“You guys look at the date, doesn’t it look like being patched later? You guys look at ‘XX,’ doesn’t it look like being just written? How could such an old medical record be found? It must be forged.”[152]


Known to everyone
Within 15 minutes of Mr. Han Renjun’s posting the medical record of Han Han’s scabies treatment, many internet users predicted the most likely responses by Fang Zhouzi would be: He would never apologize; he would continue his fight against Han Han by either pretending to be a blind to the evidence, or trying to demonstrate the document to be a forgery.


Sure enough, when Fang’s water army was send out to launch a counterattack, their instinct reaction was to accuse the document of a forgery. One of the soldiers, melxxx, who had neither an avatar, nor followers and posts on his homepage, posted 56 comments in 48 minutes, and the following message was the first one and repeated 14 times in 10 minutes:

“It is obviously a fake! Even the characters on it were added just recently.”[153]

And he posted the following message, apparently talking to Han Han’s supporters, 16 times in 12 minutes:

“You are doing everything you can to defend a liar, I really feel sorry for you!”[154]

Fang Yunqiu, Fang’s second sister (SS) and one of the core members of Fang’s family army[155], made the following comment under her fake ID “滤波filtering”:

“Old Han has a foresight, he probably knew a long time ago that there would be the situation of today, or probably he believed firmly that Han Junior would be a historic figure, so he preserved the medical record more than ten years earlier. However, that doctor did have a beautiful physician-style handwriting, so she must be a good doctor who reads and writes seriously.”[156]

If you don’t understand the meaning of her last sentence, here is the SS’s undertone: since Han Han laughed at Chinese physicians’ scribbled handwritings in his Seeing a Doctor, and the handwriting on the medical record looked legible, therefore, either Han Han lied, or the essay wasn’t written by him. As a matter of fact, the SS made it much clearer one week later:

“This ironclad evidence demonstrates that either Han Han wrote his experience with seeing a doctor based on pure imagination; or another Han Han wrote his personal experience with the seeing a doctor.”[157]

Have you got it? According to Fang’s Second Sister, who serves as Fang’s key strategist, Han Han is guilty of something no matter whatever evidence he could find. And what Fang Zhouzi did was just “demonstrate” that with his fraudulent and evil “analyses.”



Demagoguery
Two of Fang’s water army soldiers posted multiple comments on Mr. Han Renjun’s post, trying to falsify Han Han’s medical record.


3. Defy the Evidence

On Feb. 3, 2012, at 10:53, nine hours after Mr. Han Renjun posted Han Han’s medical record, Fang published his “analysis,” entitled Han Han’s Medical Record Falsifies Han Han’s Seeing a Doctor, which would be his final formal analysis in the series. Here is its opening paragraph:

“I have already written 3 articles to analyze Seeing a Doctor, authored by Han Han, and I have pointed out that what the essay described was Han Han’s personal experience with seeking for a treatment of his scabies in a big hospital in Shanghai in 1999, as the both father and son of Han’s family said; rather, it is more like a memoir of seeing doctors by a hepatitis patient in the 70s and 80s of the last century. To demonstrate that what was written in Seeing a Doctor is real, Han Han’s father Han Renjun posted on Weibo the medical record at that time. I didn’t doubt the fact that Han Han suffered from scabies at the time and saw a doctor, only that the essay was not about the experience. Therefore, posting the medical record won’t prove what was written is real. On the contrary, by comparing this medical record with what Han Renjun said before, and what was written in Seeing a Doctor, more interesting things [than] previously found can be discovered.”[158]

So, what were the “more interesting things” the Mighty Fang discovered by the comparison? Here is the first one: According to the medical record, it was Jan. 11, 1999, when Han Han went to the Jinshan County Central Hospital; however, according to Han Renjun’s My Son Han Han, Han Han went home on Jan. 18, 1999. Obviously because he was unable to make anything out of this discovery, Fang generously let it go easily: “This is only an unimportant little mistake.”[159]

(1) Jinshan Hospital

Fang’s other discoveries were supposedly important and big. Here is the next one:

“The Central Hospital of the Jinshan District of Shanghai City has complete departments and advanced facilities, it is a comprehensive hospital combining medical treatment, education, and scientific research together, belonging to the second level’s first class [in China’s hospital classification system], and it has an independent dermatology department. It differs from the hospital described in Seeing a Doctor where the dermatology and surgery were in the same department. The combination of dermatology and surgery into one department was the situation in small hospitals in the 1970s or before. Furthermore, the Jinshan Central Hospital has an emergency department, so how come [a person] seeking for emergency treatment went to the combined department of dermatology and surgery? Does anyone know which hospital has an emergency room in the dermatology department?”[160]

Of course Fang’s big discovery was a theft. 14 minutes after Mr. Han Renjun posted the medical record, at 1:47, a Fang-lover who called himself Wang Yiqiao (王一桥), but later changed his ID to “Leaning on a railing and watching the sea” (凭栏观沧海), posted the following comment:

“After looking up, it was in 1997 when the Jinshan County became Jinshan District. May I ask Han Han, where did the ‘Shanghai City Jinshan County’ on the emergency record come from? Copy to @Fang Zhouzi, @Wang Zhihua, @Maitian”[161]

And the other Fangangsters immediately began to focus on the issue. At 2:14, a Zhou Yiqiang (周易强V) posted the following message:

“In 1956, [the hospital] changed its name to Jinshan County People’s Hospital, in 1998 changed to Shanghai Jinshan District Central Hospital, it has complete departments and advanced facilities, it is a comprehensive hospital combining medical treatment, education, and scientific research together, belonging to the second level’s first class.……”[162]

Two minutes later, this person posted the above message on his homepage, and notified Fang his discovery[163]. Then, another thug, “RONIN1994,” began barking at the red herring as loudly as he could:

“Terrible, big loophole! 【in 1998 changed to Shanghai Jinshan ‘District’ Central Hospital】. Your record was written in 1999, how come it was still Jinshan County? @Fang Zhouzi”[164]

“Horrible, a loophole appeared. Encyclopedia shows 【in 1998 changed to Shanghai Jinshan ‘District’ Central Hospital】.”[165]


And these “discoveries” were all used by the fraudulent fraud fighter Fang to continue his “questioning,” even though Mr. Han Renjun had already, at 3:14 in the morning, responded to them:

“Jinshan was a county before, in 1997, it was combined with SINOPEC Shanghai Petrochemical Company to establish the district, and since then, many related units have changed their names. I don’t know when Jinshan County Central Hospital changed its name; however, I do know that many units used their previously printed materials for a rather long time. I won’t talk anymore, [I’m] tired, [I’ll] take a shower and go to bed.”[166]

It was later demonstrated that the Jinshan Hospital only became a “second level’s first class comprehensive hospital” in 2005[167], and there is no evidence available to show that the hospital had an independent dermatology department before 2004 – even in 2012, the department didn’t have a chief physician[168]. However, these facts mean nothing to the John Maddox Prize winner.

(2) A Piece of Paper

Besides the discrepancy in the hospital’s names, Fang also listed 3 more “important and big” discoveries: the first was that the medical record was written on only one side of the paper, but in the essay, it says that the case description was written on the back of a card. Also, according to Fang, it does not like a big hospital in 1999 if a case card was still in use[169].

The fact is, Fang’s this discovery was actually made by another Fangangster, Dr. Li Changqing (李长青, web ID lw56102), who received his MD in 2010 from the medical school of Shandong University. Although Dr. Li got his doctoral degree with the help of many TCM doctors – two of the three reviewers of his dissertation were TCM doctors, and three of five of his defense committee members were TCM doctors[170] -, Dr. Li hates TCM vehemently[171].


A TCM-educated TCM-hater
Dr. Li Changqing received his MD degree in 2010 from the medical school of Shandong University. His doctoral dissertation was reviewed by two Traditional Chinese Medicine doctors, and he defended his dissertation in front of three TCM doctors. And yet, he declares that “TCM is the enemy of modern medicine and the health of modern people,” and he proudly claims that he is “a little well-known TCM-hater.”[171] Dr. Li is a Fang-lover, and they both collect money from the Healthier Chinese website registered in Hong Kong by a Beijing merchant Zhou Weidong, who had invested heavily on developing TCM injections[172]. Dr. Li serves as the chief editor of the website, and Fang serves as its chief advisor[173].


Anyway, at 10:25 on Feb. 3, 2012, about a half hour before Fang posted his final “analysis,” Dr. Li posted this comment and notified Fang at the same time:

“In the original text in Seeing a Doctor, it was a card, and this [medical record] is a page of paper in the patient’s disease history booklet; the original text said the information about the patient was on the face side, and the patient history was written on the back; however, this record shows the words are all on one side only. For the purpose of literary modification, it is completely unnecessary to modify the detail, so it is obvious that the original text was written at the time when the hospital was still using the medical card, and that time is definitely not the end of 1990s. Copy to @Fang Zhouzi.”[174]

And Fang duplicated Dr. Li’s argument faithfully:

“This piece of medical record is a page in the patient’s disease history booklet, having the characters on one side only. However, in Seeing a Doctor, it says that [what was used] was a patient’s disease history card, patient’s disease history was written on the back of the card. What described in the essay was that the patient’s disease history cards were still being used, which doesn’t look like what happened in a big hospital in 1999.”[175]

(3) More Stolen “Discoveries”

Fang’s last two “important and big” discoveries were based almost entirely on a comment by a Fang-lover “It is not tourism, but asceticism” (不是旅行----而是苦行), posted at 2:30 on Feb. 3, 2012:

“[He] forgot that he wrote the pharmacist was unable to read the prescription, even your old daddy I am able to read ‘Crotamiton Cream 10gx10,’ you thought the fucking pharmacists were all illiterates? In Seeing a Doctor, Han Han said even his face had scabies, however, in the case record, no such a description can be found. This is a joke. In Seeing a Doctor, Han Han was unable to locate his itching spots, but in the record, it writes in black and white that there were scratches. @Fang Zhouzi.”[176]

And here is what Fang wrote:

“On the medical record, it says that the certain parts of the patient’s body had scratches, therefore, it should be clear where the itching was, rather than like what Han Han said in Seeing a Doctor that he was unable to locate the itching spot.

“On this medical record, the prescription ‘Crotamiton Cream’ was clearly written, the handwriting is neat and legible, rather than scribbling as described in Seeing a Doctor, Han Han ‘who reads books for many years, believes himself to be knowledgeable, however, was unable to recognize a single character,’ even the cashier was unable to read, needed to ask for help from an old physician. Also, ‘Crotamiton Cream’ is a commonly used skin drug, it won’t be like what was written in Seeing a Doctor, the pharmacy in the hospital didn’t have it, and the patient needed to purchase it from another drug store.”[177]


And based on the above idiotic “analyses,” Fang concluded:

“Therefore, the medical record posted by Han Renjun demonstrates exactly that what was written in Seeing a Doctor is not Han Han’s experience with seeking for a medical treatment of his scabies in Jinshan District Central Hospital in 1999; rather, it is a recollection of seeing doctors in the 1970s and 1980s by a mid-aged author.”[178]

Do you still remember that in his previous “analyses,” Fang said the story occurred “in the 1960s or 1970s (or even earlier)” and “in the 1970s or before”? And in his final analysis, it occurred “in the 1970s and 1980s.” The John Maddox Prize winner has a golden mouth - he can say anything he wants, disregarding anything else, including his own words. Here are two of the thousands of negative comments on Fang’s evil “analysis”:

“I don’t know what I should say to an importune thing like you. No matter how many evidences Han Han brings out, they are all forged in your eyes. In your world, anything you said is right, anything against you is wrong and should be suppressed. A Monster like you should have not returned to China. Had you stayed in the U. S., China’s progress would have been faster.”[179]

“Mr. Fang, do something meaningful. There are so many fake and shoddy products on the market, and they harm [people’s] health badly. Aren’t you very powerful? Bust frauds, why do you compete against Han Han? You are very famous already; you don’t need to increase your visibility any more. Please do something we are unable to do!”[180]


Conclusion

By Feb. 3, 2012, Fang’s new season, which was started one week earlier and intended to provide hard evidence to substantiate his allegation leveled against Han Han in the previous “season,” had gone back to its original point, which was to try to cast doubt on Han Han’s character in people’s mind. In other words, what the fraudulent fraud fighter Fang has been doing in the past 15 years has been nothing but character assassination. The problem for him was, by the end of January 2012, there was almost no one else who still believed him, except for his loyal gangsters.

In many aspects, Fang’s campaign to fix Han Han’s father Han Renjun as the author of Seeing a Doctor was the most crucial battle in the entire Hanly War. As a matter of fact, to some extent, it was equivalent to Adolf Hitler’s Battle of Stalingrad in the World War II. Of course, both Fang and Hitler were defeated in these battles, and both of them were never able to recover from these defeats. In other words, although Fang’s fight against Han Han is still ongoing after being started more than 3 years ago, the Hanly War was essentially over about two weeks after Fang’s participation.

On Jan. 28, 2012, Mr. Bei Zhicheng (贝志城, web ID 一毛不拔大师) initiated a poll: Were Han Han’s articles ghostwritten? In one week, 40,507 Weibo users voted, and only 11% of the voters believed that the allegation against Han Han was legitimate, while 77.6% of them believed that the allegation was groundless, the rest was just watching[181].


Not fooled by the fraudster
From Jan. 28 to Feb. 4, 2012, 40,507 Weibo users voted in a poll asking whether they believe that Han Han’s articles were written by other people. 77.6% of the voters said no, 11% said yes, 11.5% undecided.


One day later, Mr. Bei created another poll, asking: “After [watching] Fang Zhouzi’s fights against Luo Yonghao and Han Han, have you changed your opinion of Fang?” 72% of the voters said yes, and 92% of these voters had a negative change, and15,607 individuals (52.8% of total) believed that Fang’s character had bankrupted[182]. Of course, Fang would try to fix Mr. Bei as a murderer one year later[183].


Character bankruptcy
52.8% of Weibo users believed that Fang’s character had bankrupted by Feb. 5, 2012, and only 1.3% of the voters liked him more than before.


On Jan. 29, 2012, because Han Han announced that he was going to sue Fang Zhouzi in the court of law, the official Weibo account of Sina Culture created a poll, “Han Han vs. Fang Zhouzi: Whom Do You Support?” By the time the poll was closed one week later, a total of 83,031 Weibo users had casted their votes, and Han Han’s support rate was 81.3%, vs. Fang’s 18.7%[184].


Extreme unpopularity
By Feb. 5, 2012, after having published more than a dozen anti-Han articles and hundreds of anti-Han posts, Fang’s support rate was 18.7%, compare with Han Han’s 81.3%.


On Jan. 29, 2012, the Topic Today on qq.com was The Method Fang Zhouzi Used to Bust Han Han Is Wrong. In the article, Fang’s various foul plays and wrongdoings were exposed to illustrate Fang’s many “questionable approaches”[185]:

1. Too arbitrary and incautious when analyzing his data;

2. Looking only for favorable evidence, and disregarding its reliability;

3. Ignoring the unfavorable evidence, labeling all those people with opposite opinions Han-lovers;

4. Framing Han Han with the mean of suggestion;

5. Making factual errors.


On Feb. 10, 2012, Southern People Weekly published a group of articles discussing Fang’s attack on Han Han, among them was one entitled Fang Zhouzi against Fang Zhouzi, by Mr. Liu Yanwei, one of Fang-lovers among China’s journalists. Here is his introductory section:

“Every one of my readers knows that I am a loyal fan of ‘anti-fraud and anti-pseudoscience hero Fang Zhouzi.’ Since 2006, I have been sparing no effort to promote Fang’s articles and propagandize his thinking in the media columns I have been in charge of. More than a month ago, I wrote an article to a newspaper, The Person Who Has Touched China: I Want to Cast My Vote for Fang Zhouzi. At the time, there were people who said that Fang Zhouzi didn’t bust the frauds committed by officials and the people inside the system, I was extremely upset when I heard it, and wanted to defend Fang Zhouzi. Of course I didn’t do those things out of partiality, rather, I did them because I think that Fang Zhouzi’s scientific thinking and his courage to fight the frauds are rare products in current China, and thus worth promoting.

“However, I cannot agree with the Fang Zhouzi who is questioning Han Han. To show my support for the former Fang Zhouzi, I examine the latter Fang Zhouzi with the principles of the former Fang Zhouzi.”[186]


The so called “the principles of the former Fang Zhouzi” were what Fang had been preaching to other people on how to fight against fraud: “hearsays are not evidence,” “stories are not evidence,” “coincidences are not evidence,” “making reasonable hypothesis, and verifying it accurately,” “one should not select only the data advantageous to himself, but ignoring the disadvantageous ones,” “playing dumb, remain silent, and pretend nothing has happened is the last strategy of all the imposters when their frauds are brought to light”[187]. And Mr. Liu the ex-Fang-lover would demonstrate, item by item, point by point, that what Fang had been doing to Han Han was just the opposite of these doctrines.

However, despite of these public outcries, Fang made a series of shameless victory declarations. Feb.3, 2012, when interviewed by Shanghai-based Xinmin Weekly, Fang claimed:

“What can be confirmed right now is, Han Han’s those early writings were not written by him, they were ghostwritten. However, I cannot be certain that the ghostwriter was his father. It is possible there was another ghostwriter.”[188]

On Feb. 10, 2012, in an article published in his column in Xinhua Daily Telegraph, Fang claimed that “many physicians unanimously believe” that the symptom described in Seeing a Doctor is not scabies; and Fang concluded that what described in the essay was the itching caused by other factors, such as hepatitis[189]. It was found out by me last year that the entire article was plagiarized from an article which itself was a plagiarism. The story will be told in the next part of this Open Letter to Nature.

Probably at the same time when he committed the transcontinental plagiarism, Fang told a reporter with China News Weekly that he had “actually already proved” that Han Han’s writings were written by ghostwriter(s)[2].

In March 2012, Fang declared on tudou.com that he had found dozens of indirect evidences to prove that Han Han’s early writings were actually written by a mid-aged man, and Fang proclaimed that his conclusion is very reliable[190].

In other words, Fang’s conclusions are predetermined, and once he has determined to incriminate a person, that person is already convicted in the court of Fang’s Law, no matter how many evidences and eye witnesses that person could find to prove his innocence. On the other hand, no matter how many evidences have been found and presented to demonstrate his evildoings and crimes, Fang will never admit his guiltiness. Fortunately, Fang’s Law prevails only in a limited domain and limited period, and that domain is diminishing, and that period is fading away.


Shameless and repetitive victory declaration
In March 2012, Fang declared on tudou.com that he had proven that Han Han’s early writings were actually written by a mid-aged man[190].
主题 发布者 已发表

Open Letter to Nature, Part XL: The Hanly War (I) (2431 查看) 附件

亦明 June 22, 2014 02:30PM

Open Letter to Nature, Part XLI: The Hanly War (II): Fang’s Water Army (I): Introduction_1 (3210 查看)

亦明 September 10, 2014 04:56PM

Open Letter to Nature, Part XLI: The Hanly War (II): Fang’s Water Army (I): Introduction_2 (2058 查看) 附件

亦明 September 10, 2014 05:10PM

Part XLII: The Hanly War (III): Fang’s Water Army (II)_1 (1202 查看)

亦明 October 05, 2014 12:35PM

Part XLII: The Hanly War (III): Fang’s Water Army (II)_2 (2487 查看) 附件

亦明 October 05, 2014 12:37PM

Part XLIII: The Hanly War (IV): The Rumormonger_1 (1311 查看)

亦明 November 04, 2014 02:44PM

Part XLIII: The Hanly War (IV): The Rumormonger_2 (1208 查看) 附件

亦明 November 04, 2014 05:26PM

Part XLIV: The Hanly War (V): The Incriminator_1 (1271 查看)

亦明 November 19, 2014 03:28PM

Part XLIV: The Hanly War (V): The Incriminator_2 (1205 查看)

亦明 November 19, 2014 03:31PM

Part XLIV: The Hanly War (V): The Incriminator_3 (1167 查看) 附件

亦明 November 19, 2014 03:36PM

Part XLV: The Hanly War (VI): The Intimidator_1 (1181 查看) 附件

亦明 January 11, 2015 02:05PM

Part XLV: The Hanly War (VI): The Intimidator_2 (1076 查看)

亦明 January 11, 2015 02:08PM

Part XLV: The Hanly War (VI): The Intimidator_3 (1237 查看)

亦明 January 11, 2015 02:10PM

Part XLV: The Hanly War (VI): The Intimidator_4 (1089 查看)

亦明 January 11, 2015 02:12PM

Part XLVI: The Hanly War (VII): The Pseudoscholar_1 (1202 查看) 附件

亦明 January 28, 2015 12:23PM

Part XLVI: The Hanly War (VII): The Pseudoscholar_2 (1022 查看)

亦明 January 28, 2015 12:25PM

Part XLVI: The Hanly War (VII): The Pseudoscholar_3 (961 查看)

亦明 January 28, 2015 12:26PM



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.