已正式邀请美国《科学》杂志和郝忻采访肖氏反射弧记者招待会
(2011-04-22 08:27:36)
转载
标签：
白岩松
方舟子
肖氏反射弧
志愿者
郝忻
肖传国
柴静
杂谈
【我回头看了一下郝忻给SCIENCE写的稿。实话实说，相对白岩松、柴静的煽情、诛心、罔顾事实、一犬吠影百犬吠声，郝忻的文章已经算不错了。http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=714&do=blog&id=380535 可惜，明显的偏颇和先入为主，明显的故意掩盖那些中国外国的所谓“志愿者”、特别是所谓“批评者”根本不是专业人士而是方舟子的网上匿名帮凶的事实，掩盖我和方舟子的个人恩怨历史，让人遗憾。当然，可以理解。当初这网上又有几个人不是如此？现登出一位美国教授系主任的两封EMAIL，其主要内容是谈及郝忻对他的采访。希望Science和郝忻今后的采访能更客观、公正】
Dear CG,
It is wonderful to finally hear from you directly. After i learned of your troubles I tried desperately to contact you without success. Finally, your wife was kindly emailed me. I was and am greatly distressed at the injustices that you are facing.
Please let me know if there is anything that I can do to help you or your family.
On Oct 25, 2010 I was contacted via email by a woman calling herself Hao Xin. She stated that she was a "contributing correspondent" for the journal "Science." She stated that she was preparing an article about your work. In her email she also asked me questions about the 2008 Huangshan conference.
At my request we subsequently spoke for several hours on the phone.
She was asking questions regarding the conference in a manner that led me to believe that she questioned its legitimacy. I told her that it was a very high quality scientific meeting similar to many others which I had attended throughout the world and that there was nothing unusual about the meeting at all. I was honored to attend, honored to be asked to present some of my research, and honored to meet my Chinese colleagues.
The she asked me about your work. I became alarmed because the tone of her questions indicated that she was questioning your integrity. I defended you and your work vigorously. I told her about you diligence and hard work in
my department. I told her how you overcame great obstacles to conduct your research. I told her I had seen with my own eyes your performing the operation. I told her I spoke to the parents of your patients personally through an interpreter. I told her about the tears of joy in the eyes of the parents of your patients and how grateful they were to you and your team.
She was questioning some of your statistics. Again, I defended you vigorously.
I also told her that she had no right to author an article critical in any way about you and your work unless she first spoke to you personally. I told her bluntly that that was irresponsible, unscientific, and unjust.
I then wrote an email to the Editor of Science. In that email I expressed all the above opinions. I told the editor that Science should not publish any article without having interviewed you personally. Unfortunately, the editors did not see fit to respond to my email.
I know you and your family are living a nightmare. I can only hope that justice is done and that you are completely vindicated. Please keep in touch with me and your other friends as best you can.
Please reply to this email so I know you received it.
I said a long time ago I think you will win the Nobel Prize. I still believe that and hope that I am still alive to see that day - the ultimate vindication.
XXXXXX
Julia, I have been trying to contact you and CG via email for many many months. I have heard very disturbing news regarding CG. I called Ken Peters, but he was not able to give me very much information. Is there anything that I can do to help? Please let me know as soon as possible.
Several months ago I was contacted by a freelance Chinese writer here in the US from Science magazine. She had planned to write a story about CG's work. I told her it was unfair to publish any critique of his work until she spoke directly to CG rather than simply reading his writings and blogs. She asked me questions about CG's work. I gave him the highest praise for integrity and quality of work while in my department. I wrote to the editors at Science magazine with the same demand. Nothing should be published without speaking to CG directly.
Please give me an update on CG's situation and yours.
XXXXXX