• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Arday life and death

Indeed.

What matters are the many dozens of passages copied from someone else's thesis, many of them were obvious copy/paste because the same spelling and grammar mistakes were copied over in the same places. I don't buy his claim that it was all a mistake. You don't copy dozens of passages and forget to attribute ALL of them. He also failed to attribute work from several others' academic papers aside from his plagiarism of Paula Zwozdiak-Myers' thesis. That is nailed-on academic fraud.

In my experience, people who cheat tend to also be liars, and Arday was a fantasist and serial liar of epic proportions!! Give that fact, there is no reason to believe anything he claims about his upbringing. Investigations and journalistic scrutiny have found a profound lack of supporting evidence for his claims about his childhood, with many of his central assertions being directly contradicted by witnesses.

On his clain that he was "non-verbal until 11, several childhood peers and next-door neighbours came forward stating they spoke with him regularly during those years. A childhood neighbour who lived next to him for 24 years said he "spoke all the time," while schoolmates recalled him being quiet but definitely not mute.

On his claim that we was illiterate until he was 18, skeptics and media ask how he could have complete a secondary school education without literacy.
Arday was 'selectively mute' not 100% non-verbal.

You believe everything you read in the papers. Next time, ask yourself what might be the motivation behind it. We saw today how papers like the TIMES and TELEGRAPH - the same ones that ran character assassination campaigns against Arday - have been caught red-handed publsihing fake US-backed polls falsely claiming Starmer was unpopular and lying that Reform limited company party were 'overwhelmingly' in the lead. Why do people believe this stuff so easily? Maybe it's because they want to believe it or they have no idea how persuasion works.
 
Last edited:
This is a gross simplification to illustrate the point but the sociological difference between the USA and the UK re race is that in the USA, your race is stamped on your birth certificate.
It's not on my birth certificate. I just went and checked. It also wasn't on my recently departed dad's birth certificate. Nor my mother's, nor those of my siblings. I've recently seen all of those in the process of getting everything switched to my mother's name.
Race was stamped on my Grandfather's immigration papers, granted it was in the 20s and it was "Irish".

ETA: Did a little googling, apparently race is sometimes written on birth certificates and sometimes not, mostly up to the parents as to what they want to right down or not.
That's an oversimplification to the point of basically being a lie. When a child is born, parent's self-declared race is commonly recorded for demographic data collection purposes. Most birth certificates issued do not contain this information, so it is not "stamped on" your birth certificate. And it has zero legal significance anyways.

My birth certificate shows the race of both parents.

That was long ago. This is the sort of thing that varies by state and era.

As best I can tell, the state of Texas continues to record the race of both parents, but it looks as though a distinction might be drawn between the Certificate of Birth that must be registered with the state and something called the legal birth record:

From 1994 to present color or race is not present on the legal birth record.

I was born in Fort Worth, which is in Tarrant County. When I was growing up, open racism was rampant in Fort Worth (as it was in the rest of Texas). Racism is less open now, and has become more difficult to distinguish from political partisanship, with which it is now highly correlated. (Until the mid-sixties, the Democratic party was the more racist party. That has changed.)

Consider, for example, the 29% reduction in polling places that Tarrant County commissioners approved on Tuesday by a party-line vote of 3-2. Fort Worth is one of the most populous cities in the United States that still votes Republican, with 52% voting for Trump in 2024. On the other hand, its demographics are changing. The city was mostly white into the mid-1990s, but is now majority-minority, with 37% white. Having fielded an extraordinarily weak Senate candidate this year, and with a governor whose rabid advocacy (and recent flip-flop) with respect to construction of large data centers has made the governor's and lieutenant governor's races competitive, the Republicans are pulling out all the stops to suppress the vote in areas with large concentrations of minority, Democratic, and college student voters. (Those three demographics are correlated.)

That's just an example of how racism has become hard to separate from cultural and political divisions.

I know nothing about the UK, which I can easily believe is far less racist than the US, which (as we have seen :duck: ) has made it much easier to discuss the life and death of Jason Arday without mentioning race.
 
This is what sticks out about it to me; the far right crazies here in Sweden are up in arms about this. They have, to my knowledge, never so much as mentioned academic fraud before, much less discussed it. Now they do so gleefully.

It seems clear that he wasn't what he pretended to be, but the furore is very strange. There was a truly horrifying case here some years ago, involving a high profile surgeon who had purportedly performed successful experimental trachea surgeries. He killed seven of the eight patients he operated on here. Killed. He had lied about some of his credentials, and some of his research was later found to be fraudulent, and he is now in prison.

This has of course been disussed in academic and medical circles, and talked about in the media, but despite the fact that Macchiarini was the cause of several deaths, solely due to his seemingly complete disregard for human life, his name has never reached the kind of herostratic fame that Arday's has.
Ah, yes. I remember reading about him, also in Stuart Ritchie’s book Science Fictions. I seem to remember one of his patients was a Russian ballerina.

Yes, it is amazing how many people are suddenly interested in academic fraud and extremely, indignant about Arday, having never apparently cared much about the subject before.
 
Arday was 'selectively mute' not 100% non-verbal.
This is not what he originally claimed... he walked back to this AFTER the evidence came out... so caught in a lie, then revised the claim, then claimed it is what he has claiming all along. Same with the claim of running 600 miles in 6 days - when the truth came out, he walked it back to 600 miles in 12 days, and said that was always his claim, so again, caught in a lie, then revised the claim, then claimed it is what he has claiming all along.

You should be familiar with this technique....

You believe everything you read in the papers. Next time, ask yourself what might be the motivation behind it. We saw today how papers like the TIMES and TELEGRAPH - the same ones that ran character assassination campaigns against Arday - have been caught red-handed publsihing fake US-backed polls falsely claiming Starmer was unpopular and lying that Reform limited company party were 'overwhelmingly' in the lead. Why do people believe this stuff so easily? Maybe it's because they want to believe it or they have no idea how persuasion works.
Yada yada yada. The same claims have been debunked in those bastions of left wing politics, The Guardian and The New York Times.

The Guardian and The New York Times both interviewed childhood acquaintances and school friends to scrutinize these timelines, revealing mixed recollections and inconsistencies regarding the severity and duration of his developmental delay. The BBC have remained suspiciously silent about those claims - one could almost think they know they can't take a position on the side they desperately want to take, because it will be loser, and they'll be on a hiding to nothing!

When he lost those three, you could pretty much stick a fork in him - he was done.
 
Why did Harris of Plymouth start fine-tooth combing through Arday's theses (sic.) in the first place, and then get in touch with Groves?

Prof Harris was writing a book, the third in a series, this one covering the academic discipline Arday worked in. He wasn't initially aware of Arday at all and the book was almost finished when a colleague drew Arday to his attention. Prof Harris then recognised that it would be a very serious omission if he failed to cover Arday's work in the book. He therefore got hold of his published papers (not his thesis as far as I know) and started to read through them to get a handle on the details of his research interests.

Prof Harris said that it was this exercise, reading a number of papers back to back, that caused him to recognise the anomalies, the discrepancies and the duplication. For example the same words were attributed to different interview subjects in different papers. Puzzled (and suspicious, although he didn't say that to Arday), he sent a polite email to Arday asking for his comments on the points he'd noticed. Arday replied with a rude and aggressive email accusing him of racism, and threatening to call the cops on him if he contacted him again. Prof Harris did reply, briefly, and Arday made a police complaint against him alleging harassment.

All over some minor professor nobody but a small handful had even heard of.

That's a debatable point. I had never heard of him, but I don't watch TV or listen to Radio 4, as a rule. Prof Harris had never heard of him. But he wasn't short of a public profile. Edited (or presented?) the Today programme once. He loved publicity so long as it was adulatory. This wasn't some minor teaching post in a red-brick polytechnic that he held, it was one of the most prestigious professional chairs at Cambridge University. You have heard of Cambridge University, I take it? You're aware of its status? Most people are.
 
Speaking of which...

Helen and dirtywick seem bent on ushering us into the "it's not a big deal and making it a big deal means you're racist or a tool of racists" phase of the progressive dismissal of progressive failures.
Not att all. Your reading comprehension seems to work most of the time, so I wonder why you are so eager to misrepresent what I have written. I think academic fraud is a great deal, but I wonder why a case where the damage is far more serious, where people died as a result of such fraud, did not get such worldwide attention. And why large segments of society, here and elsewhere, never before concerned about academia, are suddenly shouting about it.

So yet again, because it seems that you completely disregard what I am actually saying, I am not in any way condoning Arday's fraud, or any academic fraud, no matter who has committed it.
 
An extract from Singal-Minded:

Arday, for years: I’m cognitively disabled, and this has brought all sorts of challenges. My college application was filled out for me by my girlfriend and I got a 9% on my first exam there. Even years later I had massive difficulties performing basic academic tasks — in grad school I was reading at about the same level as my then-3-year-old daughter. At least some of these problems still plague me, as I can’t understand what’s said to me at work 90% of the time. (Yes, he said all of this — see above and here.)

Journalists: It appears Arday was not really qualified for his position and that his race may have been a factor in his hiring. He also seems to have lied about a lot of stuff, sometimes in truly audacious fashion.

Nature and a million other slacktivists piling onto journalists who covered this controversy and in some cases circulating enemies lists of them: How dare you make this about Jason Arday’s race or intellectual ability?
 
You'd heard of him, because you brought him up in the Woody Brown thread long before this story broke. You didn't seem to think he was "some minor professor" then, you made a big deal of him.
Busted.png


Changing the facts and the recollections to suit the currently preferred narrative. Surely you expected this!?
 
Last edited:
Heh. Now it turns out his resignation letter may have been written by AI.

ETA: come to think of it, since he seemed that unable to have an original thought and just copied stuff (from people or from AI), did some AI tell him to kill himself?
 
Last edited:
Thank you for admitting you knew all along it is a (supposed) problem with the system, therefore immoral to hound one private individual with vulnerability issues to death. >240 articles within about three weeks was a sustained and sadistic pile on by the media.

You guys in the USA see everything through US 'DEI' lenses, that's why you just don't get it

Vixen,

Cofnas himself was apparently the victim of a pile on by students, teachers and administrators at Cambridge before this (his later involvement in the Arday stuff). Due to attention given to him in a student newspaper over something he had written in a personal blog post and then student protests and student complaints against him over it, Cambridge's Emmanuel College terminated his position with them claiming that his views were not in line with their DEI (EDI) objectives!

Cofnas himself was thus "canceled" from his position due to a woke pile on!

The University of Cambridge itself, however, later determined that what he expressed did not run afoul of the law nor of their own policies which they said were in place to uphold and encourage free speech.


The University of Cambridge itself thus "cleared" Cofnas even though its Emmanuel College had already gotten away with terminating his position!

Last I saw, Cofnas was still in a legal battle with them, for he had already lost a court case against Emmanuel College too but apparently before the University of Cambridge itself had made its determination.
 
Last edited:
The guy was born in London, raised in Clapham, and educated at Heathbrook Primary School in Nine Elms.
Clapham was, or is, home to one of the UK's (London's?) largest railway junctions. I would guess that in common with another famous 'railway' town, Swindon, there exists long rows of terraced houses built to house railwaymen and their families, modest, not at all unpleasant, with back gardens, yet rather back-to-back with very limited parking spaces due to the narrow streets. (My Swindon friends, all though in decently paid middle class jobs had hardly anywhere to park, with everyone needing residents parking permits.) So, I imagine Arday's parents, being from Ghana, and children of African descent doing statistically quite well at school, likely had aspirations for the young Jason albeit the area they were in was likely rather run down and depressed in parts with affluent areas conjoining it, not dissimilar to places like Islington, in North London. Willesden Junction, another railway town, is particularly grim, full of factories and rundown council estates.
 
Last edited:
My birth certificate shows the race of both parents.

That was long ago. This is the sort of thing that varies by state and era.

As best I can tell, the state of Texas continues to record the race of both parents, but it looks as though a distinction might be drawn between the Certificate of Birth that must be registered with the state and something called the legal birth record:

From 1994 to present color or race is not present on the legal birth record.

I was born in Fort Worth, which is in Tarrant County. When I was growing up, open racism was rampant in Fort Worth (as it was in the rest of Texas). Racism is less open now, and has become more difficult to distinguish from political partisanship, with which it is now highly correlated. (Until the mid-sixties, the Democratic party was the more racist party. That has changed.)

Consider, for example, the 29% reduction in polling places that Tarrant County commissioners approved on Tuesday by a party-line vote of 3-2. Fort Worth is one of the most populous cities in the United States that still votes Republican, with 52% voting for Trump in 2024. On the other hand, its demographics are changing. The city was mostly white into the mid-1990s, but is now majority-minority, with 37% white. Having fielded an extraordinarily weak Senate candidate this year, and with a governor whose rabid advocacy (and recent flip-flop) with respect to construction of large data centers has made the governor's and lieutenant governor's races competitive, the Republicans are pulling out all the stops to suppress the vote in areas with large concentrations of minority, Democratic, and college student voters. (Those three demographics are correlated.)

That's just an example of how racism has become hard to separate from cultural and political divisions.

I know nothing about the UK, which I can easily believe is far less racist than the US, which (as we have seen :duck: ) has made it much easier to discuss the life and death of Jason Arday without mentioning race.
Of course the UK is race conscious but it never had segregation so racism was never legalised. The main preoccupation is class (also an indicator of wealth), so the question 'data collectors' would ask at school was, 'What is your father's occupation?' an innocent-sounding question but the real aim was to discover your 'class'. Race was unmentionable but once a year, a school inspector would come around and ask, 'Hands up all those not born in this country?' Everybody knew what it was a euphemism for. But OTOH, unlike in the USA, segregation based on race in the Armed Forces is/was forbidden. The major distinction again being class, the officers versus the privates. The only time it's formally allowed is in denominational schools or care homes.
 
Last edited:
When you're publishing a memoir (which included a planned publicity tour), you absolutely are a public figure. By choice.

A memoir is exactly that, a person's own personal recollections and can include or exclude whatever they like. It is not like a biography whereby the author is expected to cross check facts via letters and public records. We've all read memoirs that are little more than self-serving apologistics for terrible behaviour (for example, Jeffrey Archer or Christine Keeler [or even the dreadful AK] ).
 
Clapham was, or is, home to one of the UK's (London's?) largest railway junctions. ...snip...
As usual Vixen's post starts with a mistake and runs off a post on that mistake.

Clapham isn't home to "to one of the UK's (London's?) largest railway junctions." she is confusing Clapham Junction with Clapham - they are separate areas, Clapham Junction is in Battersea, Clapham is in Lambeth. Clapham Junction is home to Clapham Junction Railway Station which is the UK’s busiest interchange station. Historically Clapham was an upmarket residential area, Clapham Junction (and Battersea) was an industrial area. The gentrification of Battersea really only started in the 1990s. (Declare an interest - I lived in Battersea in a flat that literally overlooked the railway station, I lived in Battersea not Clapham.)
 
Of course the UK is race conscious but it never had segregation so racism was never legalised. The main preoccupation is class (also an indicator of wealth), so the question 'data collectors' would ask at school was, 'What is your father's occupation?' an innocent-sounding question but the real aim was to discover your 'class'.
Race was unmentionable but once a year, a school inspector would come around and ask, 'Hands up all those not born in this country?' Everybody knew what it was a euphemism for. But OTOH, unlike in the USA, segregation based on race in the Armed Forces is/was forbidden. The major distinction again being class, the officers versus the privates. The only time it's formally allowed is in denominational schools or care homes.
◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊!
 
You'd heard of him, because you brought him up in the Woody Brown thread long before this story broke. You didn't seem to think he was "some minor professor" then, you made a big deal of him.
I only heard of him during the Woody Brown debate because he came up on my Instagram (goodness knows how Instagram was 'reading' my posts here!) via some kind algorithm. I think it was because I 'liked' a cute instagram of an Australian guy joking aorund with his autistic brother. It was the first I'd heard of him. Being a believer in academic excellence - I didn't agree with the abolition of the tripartite system - I was a bit sceptical of his claim he had never read until age 18. But he clearly got his foot on the ladder and once you are in, it doesn't matter what grades you got before. I was defendng him in that thread against the idea that autism meant lack of intelligence, although by the same coin, autism can also account for perceived so-called 'learning difficulties'.
 
Last edited:

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom