问题老张的argument有点道理也确实需要作者response
James Kung: a serial data manipulator
-
First they came for the JK, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not run FE regression.Then they came for the SC, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not trade history.Then they came for the CX, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not publish in JPE.Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
-
JK and SC have both been caught for fraudulent behaviors multiple times, with smoking gun evidence. Don't try to muddy the waters by comparing them to a junior that is being accused without any real evidence. Unless, of course, if you are JK or SC, then doing so makes perfect sense.
First they came for the JK, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not run FE regression.
Then they came for the SC, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not trade history.
Then they came for the CX, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not publish in JPE.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. -
You are CL?
First they came for the JK, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not run FE regression.
Then they came for the SC, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not trade history.
Then they came for the CX, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not publish in JPE.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. -
JK and SC have both been caught for fraudulent behaviors multiple times, with smoking gun evidence. Don't try to muddy the waters by comparing them to a junior that is being accused without any real evidence. Unless, of course, if you are JK or SC, then doing so makes perfect sense.
First they came for the JK, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not run FE regression.
Then they came for the SC, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not trade history.
Then they came for the CX, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not publish in JPE.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
without any real evidence?
-
As pointed out by the links provided in this thread, JK's papers have obvious mistakes in coding, data, and reporting. And none of his key findings exist once any of these errors get corrected. What "real evidence" are you asking for?
JK and SC have both been caught for fraudulent behaviors multiple times, with smoking gun evidence. Don't try to muddy the waters by comparing them to a junior that is being accused without any real evidence. Unless, of course, if you are JK or SC, then doing so makes perfect sense.
First they came for the JK, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not run FE regression.
Then they came for the SC, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not trade history.
Then they came for the CX, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not publish in JPE.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
without any real evidence?
-
This paper brings novel new evidence on the negative spillover effect of Prof. Kung. Not only did he pollute our field with his own fraudulent papers, but also his students and grand-students are actively following his footsteps. This indicates that Prof. Kung's impact on academia could be more persistent than we previously thought.
-
imagine what they discuss during their zoom meetings?
Only if you help drop my fixed effects and add three stars to my all my results.
“Inter-generational Transmission of Fraudulent Behavior: Evidence from JK, SC, and YC”
AER, here I come!!!JK: you need to add me as a coauthor; otherwise your story is unplausible
-
Then check this paper from CFR.
https://cfr.pub/forthcoming/papers/appel2020identification.pdf
No, he is not. CL is probably a p-hacker, but has he ever literally faked data and misreported regression results? JK has been caught repeatedly for these extreme fraudulent activities.
come on, CL is much worse than JK
-
This just says the paper is not replicable. None of JK’s paper is. But for his best pubs, he went way beyond that, and literally misreported his results and changed his data, with smoking gun evidence based the replication files he submitted. That is orders of magnitudes worse than what CL did.
Then check this paper from CFR.
https://cfr.pub/forthcoming/papers/appel2020identification.pdfNo, he is not. CL is probably a p-hacker, but has he ever literally faked data and misreported regression results? JK has been caught repeatedly for these extreme fraudulent activities.
come on, CL is much worse than JK