<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
<b><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">So What Kind of Plagiarist
is Nick Gier?<br>
<br>
</font></b><br>
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">In his October 7, 2005
lecture at Idaho Library Association Meeting
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/kidnap.htm">http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/kidnap.htm</a>),
Nick Gier claimed that
plagiarists typically fall into five categories: the common thief, the
dope, the total recall guy, the pathological plagiarizer, and the
digitized recall plagiarizer (combo of thief and dope). <br>
</font><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><br>
'Why do people capable of doing their own high level work steal in such
a blatant way? It is almost as if they want to be caught.' -- Nick
Gier, "Kidnapping Texts"</font><br>
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><br>
Nick Gier also headed up the "Petition Against Plagiarism" which
"strongly condemned the use of authors' words without proper
attribution"
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.tomandrodna.com/notonthepalouse/Documents/Plagiarism_Petition.pdf">http://www.tomandrodna.com/notonthepalouse/Documents/Plagiarism_Petition.pdf</a>).<br>
<br>
Yet a quick perusal of Nick Gier's University of Idaho hosted website
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/">http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/</a>)
turned up the following example of plagiarism according to his
criteria. Interestingly, this was posted throughout the
time of Gier's signature gathering. <br>
<br>
<br>
<b>Check it out for yourself: </b><br>
<br>
In Gier's Upanishads Lecture Notes --
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/306/upanlec.htm">http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/306/upanlec.htm</a>
-- we stumble upon
the following summary:</font><br>
<br>
________________________________________________________<br>
<br>
<p><font face="CG Times"><font color="#6f0000">Traditionally, there are
108 Upanishads (major), which are as follows:</font> </font></p>
<ol style="color: rgb(111, 0, 0);">
<font face="CG Times"> <li><font color="#6f0000"><b>Twelve <span
lang="en-us">M</span>ajor Upanishads</b><span lang="en-us">:</span></font>
</li>
</font>
</ol>
<blockquote> <font face="CG Times"> </font>
<p><font face="CG Times"><font color="#6f0000">Aitareya and the
Kauhsitaki which belong to R<span lang="en-us">i</span>g Veda</font> </font></p>
<font face="CG Times"> </font>
<p><font face="CG Times"><font color="#6f0000">Chandogya and Kena to
Samaveda</font> </font></p>
<font face="CG Times"> </font>
<p><font face="CG Times"><font color="#6f0000">Taittiriya, Katha,
Shvetashvatara, Br<span lang="en-us">i</span>hadaranyaka and Isha to
Yajur Veda</font> </font></p>
<font face="CG Times"> </font>
<p><font face="CG Times"><font color="#6f0000">Prashna, Mundaka and
Mandukya to Atharvaveda.<br>
</font></font></p>
</blockquote>
<ol style="color: rgb(111, 0, 0);" start="2">
<font face="CG Times"> <li><font color="#6f0000">Twenty—three
samanayayuvedanta Upanishads</font> </li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Twenty Yoga Upanishads</font> </li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Seventeen samnyasa Upanishads</font> </li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Fourteen vaishnava Upanishads<span
lang="en-us">: i.e., devoted to the God Vishnu</span></font> </li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Fourteen shaiva Upanishads<span lang="en-us">,
i.e., devoted to Shiva</span></font> </li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Eight shakta Upanishads<span lang="en-us">,
i.e., devoted to the Goddess</span> </font></li>
</font>
</ol>
________________________________________________________<br>
<br>
<br>
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">And yet a quick internet
search turns up the identical summary from the Yogi Ramsuratkumar
Bhavan's "An Introduction to the Upanishads" at -- </font><font
face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://sanatan.intnet.mu/">http://sanatan.intnet.mu/</a>
. Evidently, Gier simply cut and paste the
unattributed passage, added some words, and didn't even change the font
color on his
own website:<br>
<br>
</font><br>
________________________________________________________<br>
<p align="justify"><font color="#6f0000">Traditionally, there are 108
Upanishads (major), which are as follows:</font></p>
<ol style="color: rgb(111, 0, 0);">
<li><font color="#6f0000">Twelve major Upanishads,</font></li>
</ol>
<blockquote>
<ul style="color: rgb(111, 0, 0);">
<li><font color="#6f0000">Aitareya and the Kauhsitaki which belong
to Rg Veda</font></li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Chandogya and Kena to Samaveda</font></li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Taittiriya, Katha, Shvetashvatara,
Brhadaranyaka and Isha to Yajur Veda</font></li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Prashna, Mundaka and Mandukya to
Atharvaveda.<br>
</font></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<ol start="2" style="color: rgb(111, 0, 0);">
<li><font color="#6f0000">Twenty—three samanayayuvedanta Upanishads</font></li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Twenty Yoga Upanishads</font></li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Seventeen samnyasa Upanishads</font></li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Fourteen vaishnava Upanishads</font></li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Fourteen shaiva Upanishads</font></li>
<li><font color="#6f0000">Eight shakta Upanishads </font></li>
</ol>
________________________________________________________<br>
<br>
<br>
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">At least Gier's main
obsessions -- Wilson and Wilkins -- had the footnotes in the documents
but in the wrong place. Gier has no attribution at all of this other
author's work. As Gier himself says
of others: "It is inconceivable that" it "is the result of editing
errors." By his own criteria, then, what kind of a plagiarist is Nick
Gier? <br>
<br>
Are public lecture notes immune from plagiarizing? Of course not. The
law still applies. Nick urged us to sign on and "strongly condemn the
use of author's words without proper attribution." The same criterion
applies to him. <br>
</font><br>
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">This example surfaced on
Gier's website after just a cursory search. Has Gier lifted more
passages from other authors? Let the search begin.<br>
Similarly, for years, doubts have floated concerning suspicious
footnotes in Gier's *God, Reason, and the Evangelicals.* Check them
out too.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">'Why do people capable of
doing their own high level work steal in such a blatant way? It is
almost as if they want to be caught.' -- Nick Gier<br>
<br>
People who wish to register their condemnation of Nick Gier's
plagiarism, especially any of the sixty-six signers of Gier's much
touted "Petition Against Plagiarism" can send their vote to
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:What_kind_of_plagiarist_is_nick@yahoo.com">What_kind_of_plagiarist_is_nick@yahoo.com</a><br>
<br>
After all, according to many, it's just about plagiarism, nothing else.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Doug Jones<br>
</font><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>