Author Topic: W. Churchill Practiced Plagiarism?! (Read 656 times)

Maverick · « **Reply #15 on:** July 27, 2007, 12:11:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
And naturally you defend the true or perceived Nazis. It's in your nature.

I take it from your post here that you agree with churchill? That in fact there were "little eichmans" in the WTC and they deserved to be killed in that manner?

AKIron · « **Reply #16 on:** July 27, 2007, 12:17:04 PM »

Smarter liars and thieves don't call attention to themselves. I'm chalking this one up to his own stupidity.

Viking · « **Reply #17 on:** July 27, 2007, 12:23:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
I take it from your post here that you agree with churchill? That in fact there were "little eichmans" in the WTC and they deserved to be killed in that manner?

Naw, I don't, but I defend his right to voice his opinions.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #18 on:** July 27, 2007, 12:29:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
Naw, I don't, but I defend his right to voice his opinions.

No one has prevented him from voicing his opinions. No one has suggested that he be prevented from voicing his opinions.

However, he has no right to hold a publicly funded position on the basis of lies, nor does he have the right to publish lies while using that publicly funded position (a position of trust mind you) as a base of operations.

Viking · « **Reply #19 on:** July 27, 2007, 12:37:20 PM »

And you don't see how starting a witch hunt on this guy will lead to a fear of voicing controversial opinions? From what I have read he has done nothing that at least 90% of the scientific community has done as well. Research is 90% theft of other ideas and 10% originality. That's how science works; by building on the work of others. And it seems to me it is the faculty that has broken the regulations by hiring him, not Mr Churchill himself.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #20 on:** July 27, 2007, 12:53:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
And you don't see how starting a witch hunt on this guy will lead to a fear of voicing controversial opinions? From what I have read he has done nothing that at least 90% of the scientific community has done as well. Research is 90% theft of other ideas and 10% originality. That's how science works; by building on the work of others. And it seems to me it is the faculty that has broken the regulations by hiring him, not Mr Churchill himself.

No, I don't. Churchill is NOT a scientist. He has been found to have LIED to get his job, and to have LIED in his published works. If you are found to have LIED to get your job, AND to hold it, would you not expect to be fired? This clown was supposed to be a teacher! We need to pay this clown thousands of dollars a year to teach LIES? You cannot be serious. By your twisted "logic", Churchill's job should be protected, despite his lies and lack of qualifications to hold such a job, simply because he decided to make an bellybutton of himself and call murder victims Nazis. That is absurd. And stupid.

Oh, and as a person with at least 25% Indian heritage, and who has never used that heritage to gain preferential treatment, I find his use of fake heritage to further his "career" both disgusting and intolerable.

Viking · « **Reply #21 on:** July 27, 2007, 12:55:20 PM »

What did he lie about? Please post sources. I see a lot of accusations, but no corroborating evidence presented. That's what's known as a "which hunt".

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #22 on:** July 27, 2007, 01:01:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
What did he lie about? Please post sources. I see a lot of accusations, but no corroborating evidence presented. That's what's known as a "which hunt".

The term is "witch hunt". Read the article I posted. The Colorado Board of Regents had a thorough investigation done over several years, check their sources.

He lied about being part Indian.

He lied about other people's work.

He lied by fabricating work, attributing it to people who didn't exist, and then claiming it to be a valid source.

Viking · « **Reply #23 on:** July 27, 2007, 01:10:29 PM »

Oops, brain fart on the spelling.

That's my point. I see a lot of accusations, also by the CBR, but they only published their conclusions, not the corroborating evidence. Also the vote on his dismissal was not unanimous and the result was met by loud "boos" from people attending the hearing. I hope he'll sue them as he said he would.

The CBR started their "investigation" 6 years ago ... which coincides with his publication of his controversial paper. A coincidence I'm sure (sarcasm).

Yeager · « **Reply #24 on:** July 27, 2007, 01:21:01 PM »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Churchill

An interesting fellow. Well educated. Most likely a psychopathethic liar, but still, interesting to learn about.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #25 on:** July 27, 2007, 01:24:12 PM »

Maybe he could roadie for the Dixie Chicks?

Maverick · « **Reply #26 on:** July 27, 2007, 05:23:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
Naw, I don't, but I defend his right to voice his opinions.

He is certainly entitled to his opinions and no one is going to try and stop him from doing that. Using his job as a platform for his opinions is a different situation however. That's not in his job description. His employer is certainly entitled to tell him to limit the opinon slinging to his own time and resources without claiming his position to bolster them.

lazs2 · « **Reply #27 on:** July 28, 2007, 09:39:08 AM »

I support his right to voice his opinions but...

He has to state that they are his opinions and not fact and.... I don't want to pay him to voice his opinions when he is getting paid to teach.

lazs

mietla · « **Reply #28 on:** July 28, 2007, 12:08:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
What did he lie about? Please post sources. I see a lot of accusations, but no corroborating evidence presented. That's what's known as a "which hunt".

take a look at his "original" art

http://michellemalkin.com/2005/02/25/another-bizarre-twist-in-the-ward-churchill-saga/