亦明剥壳(亦明)- 中国学术评价网
 
关于方舟子造谣诽谤的严正声明 (2302 查看)
发布: 亦明
日期: February 23, 2014 11:08AM

关于方舟子造谣诽谤的严正声明



2014年2月23日,方舟子(本名方是民)在新语丝网站和其搜狐、腾讯微博公布了他与美国Jeffrey Beall就瑞士出版商MDPI和它的创办人林树坤的通信,相关链接见:2014-02-23 02:30:392014-02-23 16:252014年2月23日 16:29。在给Jeffrey Beall的第一封信中,方舟子写道:

“I am regret that you are misled by Mr. Xin Ge, who has attacked me and tried to discredit any supporters of mine by deliberate fabrications, for almost ten years after I had exposed his frauds.”【翻译:我对你被葛莘先生误导感到遗憾。自从我揭露了他的屡次造假之后,葛莘通过蓄意编造谎言对我进行了长达十年的攻击,并试图破坏我的所有支持者的信誉。】

针对上述言论,我声明如下:

第一,我曾一再指出,我研究方舟子及其附属的社会现象始于2007年9月21日,其标志就是我以“亦明”为笔名在网上发布的第一篇“方学”文章(见:《亦明:我和方舟子分手、决裂的前前后后(长篇连载)》)。因此,方舟子有责任提供证据,证明我曾经“攻击”他长达十年。

第二,众所周知,方舟子第一次在其新语丝网站上披露我的真实身份是在2010年10月16日(见:2010-10-16, 18:15:47),恰恰在我宣布“我将在周一向《科学》投稿,并且寄交MSU相关机构”之后。所谓“投稿”,就是举报方舟子1995年在密歇根州立大学就学期间抄袭该校教授Dr. Robert Root-Bernstein。(关于该抄袭案详细内容,见《方舟子抄袭剽窃年谱(2013年终版)•方舟子在1995年抄袭母校MSU教授》)。因此,方舟子有责任提供证据证明他确实在十年前揭露了我的造假案件,并且展示我的造假内容。

第三,从开始研究方舟子那一刻起,我就曾明确表示欢迎来自方舟子的诉讼:

“本人声明:本文内容属实,文责自负。方舟子如果认为本人有污蔑他的动机,发现本文有虚构不实之辞,他只管到法院控告本人,本人也一定会应诉。他所需要做的,就是在新语丝网站发一个‘方舟子预备控诉亦明,请亦明主动应诉’的启示。另外,本人在此正告方舟子:你今后对本人的一切言论,都可能成为法庭上的证据。勿谓言之不预。”(见:《亦明:我和方舟子分手、决裂的前前后后(长篇连载)》)。

不仅如此,从2011年1月起,我已经通过电子邮件和网路张贴的方式直接向方舟子发出了28个挑战,并且多次提供现金悬赏,请他对我的“方学”文章提出答辩或者反驳。(见《亦明向方舟子发出的27份挑战书》、【特别声明】)。至今,方舟子尚未对其中任何一个挑战做出回应。因此,方舟子有责任提供证据,证明我在何时何地、哪篇文章中“蓄意编造谎言”。我的“方学”文章共有中文约三百万字、英文约五十万单词,全部在网上公开。(见:China Academic Integrity Review、《亦明剥壳》)。

最后,如果方舟子不能做到以上三点中的任何一点,则其上引言论即构成对我的诽谤。我保留在中国和美国追究他──以及新语丝社──法律责任的全部权利。

此声明通过电子邮件直接寄送至方舟子的电子信箱smfang@yahoo.com,以及新语丝社的电子信箱editors@xys.org、xinyusi@yahoo.com。

特此声明

葛莘
2014年2月23日


A Statement on Shi-min Fang’s Defamation and Lies


Xin Ge, Ph. D.


Columbia, South Carolina, USA


On February 23, 2014, Fang Zhouzi (real name Shi-min Fang, or Fang Shi-min) revealed the communications between him and Mr. Jeffrey Beall, concerning MDPI and its founder Dr. Shu-kun Lin, on his website New Threads (link: 2014-02-23 02:30:39) and his microblogs on sohu.com (link: 2014-02-23 16:25) and qq.com (link: 2014年2月23日 16:29). In the first letter he sent to Mr. Beall, on an unspecific day, Fang wrote:

Dear Mr. Beall,

I am regret that you are misled by Mr. Xin Ge, who has attacked me and tried to discredit any supporters of mine by deliberate fabrications, for almost ten years after I had exposed his frauds. You didn't do your own investigation and just bought everything Mr. Ge provided. I only need to give one example. You posted a bakery store photo, apparently provided by Mr. Xin Ge, and said it’s the MDPI’s Basel headquarter. It's not. MDPI's Basel headquarter is at next door. See the attached files.

Best wishes,

Shi-min Fang


This statement concerns only the first sentence in the above letter. The rest part will be commented on later.

First, I have stated repeatedly, and it is a well-known fact in China, that I started studying Fang and the social phenomenon associated with Fang on Sept. 21, 2007, when I posted my first “Fang’s Studies” article online under my penname Yi Ming (see: 2007-09-21 22:56:00). Therefore, it is Fang’s responsibility to provide evidence showing that I have “attacked” him “for almost ten years.”

Second, it is also well-known in China that Fang first revealed my identity on his New Threads on Oct. 16, 2010 (see: 2010-10-16, 18:15:47), right after I announced that I was going to report to Science magazine and the Michigan State University (MSU) Fang’s plagiarism of Dr. Robert Root-Bernstein, a professor at MSU. The plagiarism was committed by Fang in 1995 when he was a graduate student in the Department of Biochemistry at MSU. [See: My original post: 2010-10-16 21:46:01 (please note that the two forums use different time zones); detailed story: Shamelessness Shouldn’t Be Anyone’s Nature ──An Open Letter to Nature (Part XXV): The Michigan State University Case.] Therefore, it is Fang’s responsibility to provide evidence showing that he DID expose my fraud ten years ago, and what kind of frauds I had committed.

Third, from the moment when I started my “Fang’s Studies,” I made it clear publicly that I welcome Fang’s refutation or lawsuit. Further, since January 2011, I have challenged Fang 28 times directly, by sending emails to his email box, and by posting the challenges online (See: 《亦明向方舟子发出的27份挑战书》、【特别声明】). In many of these challenges, I offered Fang cash prizes to his responses, if any. So far, Fang has yet to respond to any of my challenges. Therefore, it is Fang’s responsibility to provide evidence showing the “deliberate fabrications” in my writings, which, as of today, contain about 3 million Chinese characters and about a half million English words, all available online (Links: China Academic Integrity Review亦明剥壳.)

Finally, in case that Fang fails to do any of above, the letter he sent to Mr. Jeffrey Beall and posted on his blogs constitutes libel. I reserve my rights to pursue Fang’s, as well as the New Threads Chinese Cultural Society’s, legal responsibility in both People’s Republic of China and the United States of America.

This statement is sent to Fang’s email address at smfang@yahoo.com, and the New Threads Chinese Cultural Society’s email addresses at editors@xys.org and xinyusi@yahoo.com.



方舟子在新语丝读书论坛发表的帖子截图



方舟子在其搜狐微博发表的帖子截图



方舟子在其腾讯微博发表的帖子截图
    

 


本声明已经通过电子信箱送达方舟子
    



被编辑1次。最后被亦明编辑于02/23/2014 11:42AM。

选项: 回复引用


主题 发布者 已发表
关于方舟子造谣诽谤的严正声明 (2302 查看) 亦明 02/23/2014 11:08AM


对不起,只有注册用户才能发帖。
2250s.com does not represent or guarantee the truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any of communications posted by users.

This forum powered by Phorum.