8月12日我又给Root-Bernstein博士写了一封信，反驳其“方博士的文章实际90%左右是我的作品”的指控。从那以后我未再见到Root-Bernstein博士对此有任何回应，事情算过去了。我本不想公开此信，但现在北大法学院教授贺卫方加盟郭国松、孙海峰，炒作“方舟子剽窃美国教授”一事，我还是公开吧。

尊敬的Root-Bernstein博士，

　　我不知道你是根据什么说“方博士的文章实际90%（或该比例左右）是我的作品”，这个不公平的指控作为抹黑我的行动的一部分被张贴到了许多中文网站上。我的文章包括11个段落，只有5个段落是与源自你的文章的科学判定标准有关。即使这5个段落是直接从你的文章翻译的而没有别的内容（这是不符合事实的），那也只是我的文章的大约50%。

　　我已与中国学术不端行为作战了11年，我确信我知道怎么认定一个剽窃事例。我已咨询了两名知识产权方面的中国律师，他们都不认为我的文章侵犯了你的版权。

　　我不想与那些已骚扰我、我的家人、导师、同学和朋友多年的人交流（我再次从这个邮件列表中删掉他们的邮址）。你上次把他们放回邮件列表时，我就知道这种讨论是不会有结果的。我将不会再做出任何回应。如果你坚持要把讨论继续下去，能否把我的名字从邮件列表中删除？谢谢。

诚挚的，

方舟子

Dear Dr. Root-Bernstein,

I don’t know how you got the idea that “Dr. Fang's article is essentially 90% (or somewhere around that percentage) my work”, and this unfair charge has been posted on many Chinese Web sites as part of public smear campaign against me. My article contains 11 paragraphs, and only 5 paragraphs are about criteria of science from your article. Even if these 5 paragraphs were directly translated from your article and contained nothing else (which is not true), that would be only about 50% of my article.

I have been fighting against academic misconducts in China for eleven years, and I am confident that I know how to determine a plagiarism case. I have consulted two Chinese lawyers specified at intellectual property, and none of them thinks my article infringe your copyright.

I don't want to communicate with those persons who have harassed me, my family, mentors, classmates and friends for years (I have to delete their email addresses from the list again). As soon as you put them back to the list, I knew this type of discussion would lead us nowhere. I will not provide any further responses. If you insist keeping the discussion going, can you please kindly remove my name from the list? Thank you.

Sincerely,

Shi-min Fang