Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:02 AM   #361

HackneyedScribe's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,008

From my prior post, as the above does not address what I've already said:

You want me to prove that a random Han Nationalist backalley article is Han nationalist, with "academic or scholarly evidence"... A middle school student could point out what's wrong with that. When I demanded evidence of you, it was evidence for claims such as:
1) That the Mongols adopted a rape policy in which a bride's first three nights were taken
2) That emperor Zhu killed all males in northern China
3) 95% of the Mongol population was killed
If true, then there must be scholarly and academic evidence. That is a criteria for sweeping claims. It is not a criteria to have "scholarly evidence" just to point out a backalley article is written by a Han Nationalist. I sense a lack of common sense.


Correcting mistranslations and asking for evidence is not criteria for the translator/questioner to present sources, as the person made no claim. Bo_Wong still don't realize that after all this time. So far, all Bo_Wong did is repeat about how he has evidence and research to back his claims. Yet when it was shown that he in fact did not, he only continued and blamed our ability to read. When asked for the relevant quote from said "research" and "genetic" articles to support his claim of a very specific Mongol rape policy, he repeatedly failed to provide and only ranted about how it's there, as well as how we refuse to see it, along with how "pathetic" I am and all the good stuff. Very mature.
HackneyedScribe is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:05 AM   #362
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: England
Posts: 970

Quote:
Originally Posted by HackneyedScribe View Post
as the person made no claim.
You've made claims, but have failed to provide evidence or sources to back it up. All you've done is cherry-pick, distort, and mistranslate my sources.

I've made claims, and provided multiple research articles and genetic evidence backing up all my points.

All that you've demonstrated is your academic incompetence (your Chinese isn't very good, by the way) and dishonesty.

Enough said.

I've always suspected that you didn't have much of value to say, and you completely proved me right. Wenge was right about you.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:06 AM   #363

Clemmie's Avatar
Ye olde librarian
 
Joined: Oct 2010
From: Florida
Posts: 3,356

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Wong View Post
You've made claims, but have failed to provide evidence or sources to back it up. All you've done is cherry-pick, distort, and mistranslate my sources.

I've made claims, and provided multiple research articles and genetic evidence backing up all my points.

All that you've demonstrated is your academic incompetence (your Chinese isn't very good, by the way) and dishonesty.

Enough said.

I've always suspected that you didn't have much of value to say, and you completely proved me right. Wenge was right about you.
I wish you would quit repeating yourself. You have posted this same exact post several times.
Clemmie is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:08 AM   #364

HackneyedScribe's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,008

Yeah, no kidding. It's like talking to a running tape recorder. Things only go out, nothing goes in. Now, apparently, Bo_Wong thinks me missing one word in my translations which has no effect on the author's general meaning is displaying academic incompetence. I suppose this is somehow his revenge when I caught him leaving out an entire passage which certainly did change the author's intention by 180 degrees.
HackneyedScribe is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:08 AM   #365
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: England
Posts: 970

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clemmie View Post
I wish you would quit repeating yourself. You have posted this same exact post several times.
I thought you bowed out of this debate? I repeat myself because Hackneyedscribe has reading comprehension problems.

I'm not wasting my time writing new posts to Hackneyed, the previous post is my bottom line with him.

Unless he comes up with some arguments or evidence of his own that actually have value.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:10 AM   #366
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: England
Posts: 970

Quote:
Originally Posted by HackneyedScribe View Post
Yeah, no kidding. It's like talking to a running tape recorder. Things only go out, nothing goes in.
That's because you haven't said anything of value. I don't take garbage in.

You've made claims, but have repeatedly failed to provide evidence or sources to back it up. All you've done is cherry-pick, distort, and mistranslate my sources.

I've made claims, and provided multiple research articles and genetic evidence backing up all my points.

All that you've demonstrated is your academic incompetence (your Chinese isn't very good, by the way) and dishonesty.

Enough said.

I've always suspected that you didn't have much of value to say, and you completely proved me right. Wenge was right about you.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:15 AM   #367

HackneyedScribe's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,008

Quote:
I'm not wasting my time writing new posts to Hackneyed, the previous post is my bottom line with him.
Bo_Wong claimed this before twice. He failed both times miserably when his mental stamina wilted away. Again, he's just not that type of person.

Quote:
That's because you haven't said anything of value. I don't take garbage in.

You've made claims, but have repeatedly failed to provide evidence or sources to back it up. All you've done is cherry-pick, distort, and mistranslate my sources.

I've made claims, and provided multiple research articles and genetic evidence backing up all my points.

All that you've demonstrated is your academic incompetence (your Chinese isn't very good, by the way) and dishonesty.

Enough said.
Apparently nothing got through. Again, I will repeat what was said before:

You want me to prove that a random Han Nationalist backalley article is Han nationalist, with "academic or scholarly evidence"... A middle school student could point out what's wrong with that. When I demanded evidence of you, it was evidence for claims such as:
1) That the Mongols adopted a rape policy in which a bride's first three nights were taken
2) That emperor Zhu killed all males in northern China
3) 95% of the Mongol population was killed
If true, then there must be scholarly and academic evidence. That is a criteria for sweeping claims. It is not a criteria to have "scholarly evidence" just to point out a backalley article is written by a Han Nationalist. I sense a lack of common sense.


Correcting mistranslations and asking for evidence is not criteria for the translator/questioner to present sources, as the person made no claim. Bo_Wong still don't realize that after all this time. So far, all Bo_Wong did is repeat about how he has evidence and research to back his claims. Yet when it was shown that he in fact did not, he only continued and blamed our ability to read. When asked for the relevant quote from said "research" and "genetic" articles to support his claim of a very specific Mongol rape policy, he repeatedly failed to provide and only ranted about how it's there, as well as how we refuse to see it, along with how "pathetic" I am and all the good stuff. Very mature.

Quote:
Wenge was right about you.
The fact that you think Wenge was right about anything of me speaks more about you, I would say. Just read his hate-filled posts about how all Chinese rude and brainwashed. Better yet, just look at his posts in this thread where his only posts for me were targeted about how I shouldn't use "genocided" as a verb, or how I had less say because I'm not in China. When I pointed out I am, and that my location has nothing to do with the value of my words, he got angry and put me on ignore.
HackneyedScribe is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:17 AM   #368
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: England
Posts: 970

Quote:
Originally Posted by HackneyedScribe View Post
me missing one word in my translations which has no effect
You've mistranslated much more than one word, you completely changed the meaning of the sentence. You've made other translation errors too, but I don't want to humiliate you any further.

You've made claims, but have repeatedly failed to provide evidence or sources to back it up. All you've done is cherry-pick, distort, and mistranslate my sources, and try to make excuses and downplay your mistakes when you get caught.

I've made claims, and provided multiple research articles and genetic evidence backing up all my points.

All that you've demonstrated is your academic incompetence (your Chinese isn't very good, by the way) and dishonesty.

Enough said.

I've always suspected that you didn't have much of value to say, and you completely proved me right. Wenge was right about you.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:20 AM   #369

HackneyedScribe's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,008

^Oh look, Bo_Wong lasted all two minutes before he just had to talk to me again. It's like he's never tired about proving me right.

As for my mistranslations, I've already went over it here: http://www.historum.com/asian-histor...ml#post1270841

Quote:
You still mistranslated the first part of the sentence, and that completely distorts the intention and context of that sentence.

Stop making excuses for your academic dishonesty.
The sentence that Bo_Wong claimed that I mistranslated: 原文不符合历史,有破坏民族团结之嫌

My translation: (No records indicated in history, there is intention to destroy ethnic unity)

Bo_Wong says: It should be translated as the original written text doesn't match up with history"

As can be seen the missing word does not change the author's intention at all, the author still thinks Bo_Wong's "Baidu article" is crap and has ulterior motives. Obviously neither the editor nor I would agree with him. This can be seen by the last part of the editor's sentence, which Bo_Wong also left btw.

Now compare this with the mistranslations I caught Bo_Wong with. For example, Bo_Wong left out this entire passage of his "source" which completely changed the intentions of the author:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HackneyedScribe View Post
Please look at post 248 to see how Bo_Wong's articles is completely made up.

It's funny how Bo_Wong left out the next sentence that follows: 关于摔头胎,无论是正史还是南宋遗民,没有人记载这玩意。《铁函心史》这样的作品,连十级制度都意淫出来了 ,但对这个东西居然是一笔也没有(且不说这到底 真的是郑思肖的原作,还仅仅是托名的为了实现一些目的的伪书,要不然早不出现晚不出现偏偏那时 候出现?)

Translation:
As according to "Shuai Tou Tai", whether it is actual history or from Song Loyalists, nobody recorded such a thing. In the work of "Tie Han Xin Shi" even the ten ranks were recorded (it's basically state racism), but not even a brushstroke was recorded about this. ..... [continues with more attacks on the dubious article Bo_Wong supports, concluding that it's BS]

In other words, Bo_Wong only gave out the first paragraph but left out the rest that didn't fit with his pet theory. By doing so he completely twisted the intentions of the author. He made it sound as if the author supports his opinion when in fact he did the opposite. The author only posted the red texts Bo-Wong highlighted so readers would know what he was arguing against. This is from the very link Bo_Wong gave and used as a source, even though that very source speaks against his wild claims. Yet Bo_Wong, knowing that most forumers don't know Chinese, used the source anyway as if the source supported his claims. Again he uses Chinese as a tool in this forum to mislead forumers.

So far, all his sources as I have shown is not so much sources as much as symbols for a complete lack of academic integrity.
HackneyedScribe is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 03:21 AM   #370
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: England
Posts: 970

Quote:
Originally Posted by HackneyedScribe View Post

The fact that you think Wenge was right about anything of me speaks more about you
Wenge knows that what you say has very little value and truth, and you've proved that over and over again.

You've made claims, but have repeatedly failed to provide evidence or sources to back it up. All you've done is cherry-pick, distort, and mistranslate my sources, and try to make excuses and downplay your mistakes when you get caught.

I've made claims, and provided multiple research articles and genetic evidence backing up all my points.

All that you've demonstrated is your academic incompetence (your Chinese isn't very good, by the way) and dishonesty.

Enough said.

I've always suspected that you didn't have much of value to say, and you completely proved me right. Wenge was right about you, and he's right a lot more often than you are.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Closed Thread

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
adam smith, boat people, canton, china, tanka


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looking for a noble figure that matches this description X2theone2x European History 1 December 17th, 2011 12:21 PM
The Wealth of Nations (Adam Smith) malahmari History Help 4 January 30th, 2010 03:33 PM
Description of Charles-Town, SC Patito de Hule American History 1 January 21st, 2010 08:15 PM
Description de L'Egypt Lucius Middle Eastern and African History 1 January 2nd, 2008 12:38 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.