4 ms·

Not peer reviewed, but I saw an example of Zenz's shoddy research today: https://twitter.com/abovetheclouds/status/1377191300433387528 https://twitter.com/above

Not peer reviewed, but I saw an example of Zenz's shoddy research today: https://twitter.com/abovetheclouds/status/1377191300433387528 https://twitter.com/abovetheclouds/status/137719130043338752... He then tried to cover it up by changing the revision date, an act which amounts to academic fraud.

hkmaxpro 6y ago
Thanks for pointing out the tweets. The mistakes called out in the tweets look like typos that are not critical to the major conclusions of the paper. For instance, if the paper is about how IUD insertion changes over time, and consistently mislabels “per 100000” as “per capita” in one of the graphs, then the percentage change is unaffected by this typo. But if the curve in the graph were altered, then that would be a significant mistake (and a fraud). But it doesn’t appear to be the case in Zenz’s work. If major conclusions are affected, the papers will eventually be retracted. But if those are only typos, the papers will survive. So we will know. Can you tell me how major conclusions in his papers are affected by these changes? And also how most citations in the Newlines report are affected by Zenz’s work? I fail to see the connection of those citations to Zenz, like those I pointed out above. > He then tried to cover it up by changing the revision date, an act which amounts to academic fraud. Changes due to typos like this are not considered an academic fraud, unless these changes affects the major conclusions of the papers significantly. In the area I work with, I frequently see similar typos in research papers. No profession researcher bothers to call out such minor mistakes in tweets. And mistakes on revision dates after correcting typos are not considered fraud. That’s why I asked for peer-reviewed criticism of his work, not random tweets that nitpick on minor issues. If you are uncertain about minor/local and major/global mistakes, you can read Terry Tao’s post https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/on-local-and-global-errors-in-mathematical-papers-and-how-to-detect-them/ https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/on-l... How not to get bogged down by minor mistakes in papers when reading them https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/on-compilation-errors-in-mathematical-reading-and-how-to-resolve-them/ https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/on-c...
- cbHXBY1D 6y ago
  This situation points to an increasingly clear body of evidence that he misinterprets data - either due to his lack of speaking/reading Chinese or knowingly. For example, check out the IUD section showing his sleight of hand here: https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/18/us-media-reports-chinese-genocide-relied-on-fraudulent-far-right-researcher/ https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/18/us-media-reports-chinese-...
  - hkmaxpro 6y ago
    Thanks for your source. Let me assess how much of his conclusions and the conclusions in the news reporting are affected, assuming the Grayzone article is correct. I just take a random article from CNN: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/21/asia/xinjiang-china-response-sterilization-intl-hnk/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/21/asia/xinjiang-china-respo... One paragraph is affected: “there were almost 1,000 new IUD implants per 100,000 people in Xinjiang in 2018, or 80% of China's total for that year”. The rest of the CNN article seems correct and unrelated to Zenz’s work. This CNN article also says “Chinese officials have officially acknowledged birth rates in Xinjiang dropped by almost a third in 2018, compared to the previous year […]” There is still no satisfactory explanation for such a sudden drop in birth rate, other than a forcible suppression of birth since 2017. And there are other sources that corroborate the birth suppression claim, such as this teacher [0] and numerous detainees [1][2][3][4][5]. Also, not every claim related to Zenz is in dispute. Consider this claim from a random APN News article: https://apnews.com/article/269b3de1af34e17c1941a514f78d764c https://apnews.com/article/269b3de1af34e17c1941a514f78d764c > “Budget documents obtained by Zenz show that […] While sterilization rates plunged in the rest of the country, they surged seven-fold in Xinjiang from 2016 to 2018, to more than 60,000 procedures” This claim is not refuted by the Grayzone article. Zenz may have made “local mistakes”, but not global ones that severely impact the major conclusions of his works or in news reporting. Further, so far I have only seen one website (Grayzone) criticizing Zenz’s work, but not peer-reviewed papers or criticism from the larger research community. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/04/muslim-minority-teacher-50-tells-of-forced-sterilisation-in-xinjiang-china https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/04/muslim-minorit... [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/uighur-muslim-china-sterilisation-women-internment-camps-xinjiang-a9054641.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/uighur-muslim-... [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071 [3] https://www.dw.com/en/china-uighur-women-reportedly-sterilized-in-attempt-to-suppress-population/a-54018051 https://www.dw.com/en/china-uighur-women-reportedly-steriliz... [4] https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Xinjiang-What-China-shows-world-vs.-what-former-detainee-describes https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Xinjiang-What-China-shows-w... [5] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/abortions-iuds-and-sexual-humiliation-muslim-women-who-fled-china-for-kazakhstan-recount-ordeals/2019/10/04/551c2658-cfd2-11e9-a620-0a91656d7db6_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/abortions-...

hkmaxpro 6y ago

Thanks for pointing out the tweets. The mistakes called out in the tweets look like typos that are not critical to the major conclusions of the paper. For instance, if the paper is about how IUD insertion changes over time, and consistently mislabels “per 100000” as “per capita” in one of the graphs, then the percentage change is unaffected by this typo. But if the curve in the graph were altered, then that would be a significant mistake (and a fraud). But it doesn’t appear to be the case in Zenz’s work. If major conclusions are affected, the papers will eventually be retracted. But if those are only typos, the papers will survive. So we will know. Can you tell me how major conclusions in his papers are affected by these changes? And also how most citations in the Newlines report are affected by Zenz’s work? I fail to see the connection of those citations to Zenz, like those I pointed out above. > He then tried to cover it up by changing the revision date, an act which amounts to academic fraud. Changes due to typos like this are not considered an academic fraud, unless these changes affects the major conclusions of the papers significantly. In the area I work with, I frequently see similar typos in research papers. No profession researcher bothers to call out such minor mistakes in tweets. And mistakes on revision dates after correcting typos are not considered fraud. That’s why I asked for peer-reviewed criticism of his work, not random tweets that nitpick on minor issues. If you are uncertain about minor/local and major/global mistakes, you can read Terry Tao’s post https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/on-local-and-global-errors-in-mathematical-papers-and-how-to-detect-them/ https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/on-l... How not to get bogged down by minor mistakes in papers when reading them https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/on-compilation-errors-in-mathematical-reading-and-how-to-resolve-them/ https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/on-c...

cbHXBY1D 6y ago
This situation points to an increasingly clear body of evidence that he misinterprets data - either due to his lack of speaking/reading Chinese or knowingly. For example, check out the IUD section showing his sleight of hand here: https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/18/us-media-reports-chinese-genocide-relied-on-fraudulent-far-right-researcher/ https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/18/us-media-reports-chinese-...
- hkmaxpro 6y ago
  Thanks for your source. Let me assess how much of his conclusions and the conclusions in the news reporting are affected, assuming the Grayzone article is correct. I just take a random article from CNN: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/21/asia/xinjiang-china-response-sterilization-intl-hnk/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/21/asia/xinjiang-china-respo... One paragraph is affected: “there were almost 1,000 new IUD implants per 100,000 people in Xinjiang in 2018, or 80% of China's total for that year”. The rest of the CNN article seems correct and unrelated to Zenz’s work. This CNN article also says “Chinese officials have officially acknowledged birth rates in Xinjiang dropped by almost a third in 2018, compared to the previous year […]” There is still no satisfactory explanation for such a sudden drop in birth rate, other than a forcible suppression of birth since 2017. And there are other sources that corroborate the birth suppression claim, such as this teacher [0] and numerous detainees [1][2][3][4][5]. Also, not every claim related to Zenz is in dispute. Consider this claim from a random APN News article: https://apnews.com/article/269b3de1af34e17c1941a514f78d764c https://apnews.com/article/269b3de1af34e17c1941a514f78d764c > “Budget documents obtained by Zenz show that […] While sterilization rates plunged in the rest of the country, they surged seven-fold in Xinjiang from 2016 to 2018, to more than 60,000 procedures” This claim is not refuted by the Grayzone article. Zenz may have made “local mistakes”, but not global ones that severely impact the major conclusions of his works or in news reporting. Further, so far I have only seen one website (Grayzone) criticizing Zenz’s work, but not peer-reviewed papers or criticism from the larger research community. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/04/muslim-minority-teacher-50-tells-of-forced-sterilisation-in-xinjiang-china https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/04/muslim-minorit... [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/uighur-muslim-china-sterilisation-women-internment-camps-xinjiang-a9054641.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/uighur-muslim-... [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071 [3] https://www.dw.com/en/china-uighur-women-reportedly-sterilized-in-attempt-to-suppress-population/a-54018051 https://www.dw.com/en/china-uighur-women-reportedly-steriliz... [4] https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Xinjiang-What-China-shows-world-vs.-what-former-detainee-describes https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Xinjiang-What-China-shows-w... [5] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/abortions-iuds-and-sexual-humiliation-muslim-women-who-fled-china-for-kazakhstan-recount-ordeals/2019/10/04/551c2658-cfd2-11e9-a620-0a91656d7db6_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/abortions-...