My system is not decent

Doing research with a purpose, the test results are all wrong.

Later, they also said that there were other professionals, such as Qiu Shihua, who agreed with Jiang Zudi's question.

He also said that he personally has doubts about the carbon-14 data in the "Abbreviated Version".

Zhang Changshou also made it clear that he personally agrees with Jiang Zudi's opinion on the staging of Lixi archaeology.

The foreign professor present, named Shaughnessy, was also shocked.

This is a bit of a sense of surprise for the Allies. This person asked: In this case, is the "Western Anniversary Table" based on carbon-14 and Lixi archaeology still tenable?

Zhang Lidong, who participated in the meeting, used to be the secretary of "Engineering" and is now a doctoral student at the University of Chicago.

Look, who are these people and what are they doing now.

This former personal secretary, introduced the content of the meeting in the domestic "Huaxia Cultural Relics News" on May 2002, 5.

Among them, "engineering" experts who agreed with Jiang Zudi's point of view were also reported.

The report immediately caused an uproar in the domestic academic circles.

More than two months later, on August 8, "Huaxia Cultural Relics News" published an article entitled "Questions and Answers on a Trip to the Ugly Country——About the "Xia, Shang and Zhou Dating Project".

This was written by the author Su Hui after interviewing relevant experts, declaring that Zhang Lidong's report does not conform to the facts.

It is mainly in key links that cause readers to misunderstand.

For example, according to Su Hui and Qiu Shihua's recollection, the meeting in Chicago was different from what Jiang said before.

"Jiang Zudi asked to use a computer to check the data on the spot. According to the conditions I provided, it turned out that the difference was only 1 year. I smiled and said: 'If you do the calculation again, there may be a difference of 2 years, but this is within the allowable range of error, which does not explain anything. question.'"

Several scholars who participated in the Chicago Symposium at that time said that they heard Qiu Shihua agree with Jiang Zudi's opinion with their own ears, and were surprised by Qiu Shihua's non-serious attitude.

Xu Lianggao, the author of the 97 Lixi Excavation Report who was criticized by Jiang Wen, also had a similar performance.

In the "Huaxia Cultural Relics News", Xu argued that the periodization term he used in the report was "about equivalent to" the period of a certain king.

However, "Jiang Wen" "deleted it" when citing it, and verified the "Excavation Report".

The original text is: "Phase One: It is estimated that the date is from King Wen's move to Li to King Wu's defeat of Zhou,"

The second phase: It is presumed that its age is from the early years of the Western Zhou Dynasty to the early period of King Wu to King Cheng.

Therefore, the quotations in "Jiang Wen" are completely faithful to the original text.

From Qiu Shihua's denial of his own speeches at lectures to Xu Lianggao's denial of published texts, some scholars have doubted the academic ability and attitude of some leading scholars of "engineering".

Of course, let's just take a look at these things, at most we can just laugh at these clowns.

It turns out that they may be masters at home, but after going abroad, they become clowns.

This is the ass decides the head, not to belittle them casually.

If these people are science students, after they go abroad, in order to curry favor with the ugly master, as long as they work hard, they can get a good life.

What about some liberal arts professors and experts?

What use is Eastern culture to ugly Westerners?Best to go straight to extinction.

Therefore, some literati and scholars who went to the West to beg for food, the Eastern culture they learned became useless.

So, how to win the favor of masters in the West?

There is a way, work hard to fight against the oriental culture, dig out their roots, pierce their seedlings, and destroy the 5000-year cultural pride of the oriental power.

Therefore, such people emerge in endlessly.

In fact, there are still many people with crooked buttocks, such as some literati in the Wanwan area.

In early January 2013, Xia Hanyi, a professor of East Asian Languages ​​at the University of Chicago, made such remarks.

At the just-concluded [-]th International Sinology Conference of the Academia Sinica held in Wanbei, he questioned the "Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties Project".

He asserted that the project is "complex", and I am afraid that it is unlikely to be published in the future.

Li Xueqin, chief expert of the "Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties Project" and a professor at Huaqing University, responded that it is normal to have disputes, and the "complex version" is under review and will come out after a while.

Xia Hanyi stated that the "Jianben" only provides a general framework for the Xia Dynasty and the Shang Dynasty, and provides absolute dates for the later Shang Dynasty, but also admits that these dates are not necessarily precise.

It is completely different for the Western Zhou Dynasty. From King Wu’s defeat of King Zhou to King You’s death under Lishan Mountain, absolute dates are provided for the reign years of the 12 kings of the Western Zhou Dynasty.

Xia Hanyi believes: "The number of reigns of the kings of the Western Zhou Dynasty recorded in the "Jiang Ben" does not have a unified method with any ancient history books. If you can find support in ancient books, you can quote them, and if you can't find support, you discard them. This is obviously different from the general historiography method. disagree.

In addition to the age of King Wu's Conquest of Shang based on "Yi Zhou Shu Shi Fu Jie" and some other handed down documents, the first year of Yi Wang was based on the record of "Tian Zaidan in Zheng" contained in "Bamboo Book Chronicles", and the "Jiang Ben" contained The reign dates of the kings of the Western Zhou Dynasty are basically based on the chronological records recorded in 63 bronze inscriptions that have been published at that time.

The chronological framework and classification proposed in the "Simplified Version" not only cannot accommodate the newly discovered bronze inscriptions in recent years, but also has several important mistakes in the classification of the original 63 bronze vessels. Then it fell through. "

It is normal to have different opinions, we are just dating, not saying that this is absolutely correct.

Why dating?Only when it is confirmed that there is such a dynasty can it be determined.

From this point of view, these opponents actually recognize the 5000-year history of China.

In the "Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties Project", Xia and Shang are only regarded as a phased academic achievement, and we don't think it will become a conclusion. It is normal to have disputes.

The complex version of the Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties project report has not been published for a long time after the simplified version, mainly because the manuscript has not been finalized.

Because there is a lot of data, it needs to be very precise, so it took a long time.

In addition, there are still a lot of new materials and new data to be added, and at the same time, some opinions and opinions from the academic circles should be absorbed.

Since more than ten years have passed since the release of the simplified version, there will be some differences in the traditional version.

There will also be debates after the estimates are made, and this is the case with scientific work.

This kind of work has to be done no matter how controversial it is, mainly because it is meaningful.

First of all, the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties Project gave a rough chronology of Xia, Shang and Zhou.

This has played a role in promoting academic research in the future. As a phased result, it is not the final conclusion, and it is beneficial to academic progress through discussion.

Secondly, a large amount of investment in capital and technology has made archaeology in my country, especially at the technical level, greatly developed.

This multidisciplinary joint research is conducive to the development of archaeology, an interdisciplinary subject.