Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freedom skies/Evidence/CiteCop

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Indian nationalism 2 Indian mathematics 3 Foreign influence on Chinese martial arts 4 Bakasuprman

[edit] Indian nationalism

I asked Freedom skies to produce his sources for the following material.

• [Ancient Indian astronomy] culminated in original findings, like:

1. The calculation of occurrences of eclipses.
2. Calculation of Earth’s circumference.
3. Theorizing about gravity.
4. Determining that Sun is a star.
5. Determining the number of planets in the Solar System. [1][2]

• Indian philosopher, Pakudha Katyayana, a contemporary of Buddha, also propounded the ideas of atomic constitution of the material world.

Similarly, the principle of relativity (not to be confused with Einstein's theory of relativity) was available in the ancient Indian philosophical concept of "sapekshavadam" (c. 6th century BC), literally "theory of relativity" in Sanskrit.

Several ancient Indian texts speak of the relativity of time and space. The mathematician and astronomer Aryabhata (476-550) was aware of the relativity of motion, which is clear from a passage in his book: "Just as a man in a boat sees the trees on the bank move in the opposite direction, so an observer on the equator sees the stationary stars as moving precisely toward the west." [3][4]

These theories have attracted attention of the Indologists, and veteran Australian Indologist A. L. Basham has concluded that "they were brilliant imaginative explanations of the physical structure of the world, and in a large measure, agreed with the discoveries of modern physics."

Freedom skies' response: Would be glad to, these links [5][6][7][8] were already provided there.

Those links are the self-published work of the fringe theorist Subhash Kak.

What's worse is that with the sole exception of a single claim (about eclipses), the PDFs don't support the material for which Freedom skies cites them. Neither the words "circumference" nor "gravity" nor "sapekshavadam" nor even "Pakudha" or "Katyayana" appears in a single one of the four papers cited. Neither do the Aryabhata quote nor the A.L. Basham quote.

I've seen editors cite dubious sources and I've seen editors cite sources that don't support their claims, but Freedom skies is the only editor I have ever encountered to cite dubious sources that don't support his claims.

[edit] Indian mathematics

Jitse Niesen's comments on the references added by Freedom skies in this edit:

• "The Modern Review edited by Ramananda Chatterjee. Original from the University of Michigan. Page 634" - This probably refers to the monthly magazine Modern Review, published in Calcutta. It doesn't seem to be peer-reviewed. It's unclear what Michigan has to do with it. The reference does not include a volume number, so it is impossible to find what is being referred to.
• Replacing "Mathematical Expeditions: Chronicles by the Explorers by David Pengelley, Reinhard C. Laubenbacher" with "Toward a Global Science: Mining Civilizational Knowledge By Susantha Goonatilake (page 119)" - I don't really know which source is preferable, but I have my doubts about Goonatilake's book given that it seems to be written in order to argue that Indian's contributions to science are being ignored (anonymous (?) review) and that it got a rather negative review by Kavita Philip in Isis, Vol. 92, No. 1, pp. 247-248 (quote from the review: "The chapters on medicine and mathematics cannot therefore deal substantially with the provocative claims he [i.e., Goonatilake] puts forward.")
• "Science in Ancient India By Narendra Kumar (page 9)" - I can find very little about this book, suggesting that it is not used often. It's unclear whether it can be considered reliable.
• "Vedic Mathematics By Vasudeva Sharana Agrawala, Swami Bharati Krishna Tirtha" - don't know
• "Vedic Mathematics for Schools Bk.1 By James Glover" - this is published by Motilal Banarsidass. It doesn't seem a scientific text, according from the description at Google Books

None of the references have full bibliographic information, as normal in references. Based on all this, it seems correct to consider the references inadequate.

According to the description on its back cover, "Vedic Mathematics for Schools Bk.1 by James Glover" is "intended for primary schools in which many of the fundamental concepts of mathematics are introduced. It has been written from the classroom experience of teaching Vedic mathematics to eight and nine-years-old."

When confronted with the fact that the source he cited—far from being a scholarly work on the history of mathematics—was written for the instruction of third and fourth graders (US equivalent), Freedom skies replied, "Which would make the information incorrect then?" a response which was disrespectful to both myself and the principle of attribution to reliable sources.

Also note what Freedom skies tried to do with his citation of Modern Review, an apparent attempt to fool fellow editors into believing that the Indian nationalist magazine was a publication of the University of Michigan.

[edit] Foreign influence on Chinese martial arts

Freedom skies writes that "Similarities [between Chinese and Indian martial arts] were recorded by the British Broadcasting Corporation in a television documentary in 1981 titled "Kalari, the Indian way" which noted that a Southern Kalaripayattu practitioner performed martial arts identical to one found in a branch lineage from the Wong-Hon-Wing line of Tibetan Hop-Gar Kung-Fu."

When I was attempting to verify the sources of this article, I clicked on "Kalari Payatt: Martial Art of India by Steve Richards 2002" where, on a website topped with the banner "Tibetan, Lion's Roar, Hop-Gar, Lama Kung-Fu," I found the following passage: "This author was astonished in 1982 to witness a British BBC television documentary entitled: "The Way Of The Warrior": 'Kalari, the Indian Way'. The opening film sequence was of a Southern Kalari Payat Guru (Master) performing a traditional 'Form' that was near identical to a Tibetan Lion's Roar Lama Kung-Fu form that he had learned! This was despite a separation between the arts of many hundreds of miles and several hundreds of years. The connection was real, present and obvious."

In other words, the claim that Freedom skies is trying to attribute to a BBC documentary, he actually got from the web page of one Steve Richards.

Many of the references cited are web pages.
Of these, many, like Steve Richards', are personal or commercial in nature.
Reference 62 appears to cite The Zen Doctrine of No-Mind by D.T. Suzuki. However, if you click on the link, it takes you to the entry for The Zen Doctrine of No-Mind by D.T. Suzuki in a bookseller's online catalog. I strongly doubt that Freedom skies actually consulted the book.

[edit] Bakasuprman

Subhash Kak is a professor of electrical & computer engineering.

That does not make him a reliable source on ancient history.

WP:ATTFAQ: "A world-renowned mathematician may not be a reliable source on topics of biology."