"Scottish Independence" as a project ended in 2014 with the voters' rejection. Now it is just a trough that various grifters feed from while they still can.
Joined March 2018
- Tweets86.3K
- Following767
- Followers1.7K
- Likes17.3K
Pinned Tweet
Scottish Nationalists talking up the creation of a new currency are putting lipstick on a pig. The Scot £ is a simple necessity, not a possitive good. Meanwhile, the consequences of the loss of the pound are enormous and unavoidable.
A summary:
John Stuart Wilson retweeted
I’m a Scott Colom fanatic, but this SUCKS.
Exploiting his historic victory to harass young staffers (while being spectacularly unfunny) doesn’t make you edgy or provocative. It makes you a bottom-feeding engagement whore.
Lots of posts today are struggling with the definition of plagiarism, so let's have Wes Huff's former university clear it up.
Note the absence of an exception for bad writing by youngish Christian apologists publishing their papers to Academia.edu for the algorithm.
Wes Huff published five papers to Academia.edu as finished, original work.
All five of them contain demonstrable plagiarism.
All five were served up as finished papers he claimed ownership of.
So can we stop with the pathetic excuses and blaming Dan McCellan?
4) Until this morning, this one was also proudly displayed on Wes' website, which destroys the "Academia is for rough drafts" bullshit.
1
1
48
John Stuart Wilson retweeted
Follow-up: Wes Huff wrote this 2019 Gospel of Thomas paper as a PhD student at the University of Toronto, and when I went through it page by page, I found that its entire architecture comes from a 1999 article by Tom Thatcher, which Huff reworded and never once cites.
John Stuart Wilson retweeted
In his video, Wes said, "What's on my Academia page is not me at my best. In fact, it's a pretty good example of me at my absolute worst."
But Wes, one of your worst papers is still available to download on your personal website, and it contains obvious plagiarism.
John Stuart Wilson retweeted
Nope. Not buying it.
No one attaches a title page with a submission date to an unsubmitted "draft" ...
Wes Huff has replied to the plagiarism accusations by claiming he never submitted any of these papers that have cover sheets & submission dates on them. He also has video from one of the scholars he plagiarized saying it's no big deal.
youtube.com/watch?v=RdrHr819…
If you visit Wes Huff's page on Academia.edu, this is what you get in your inbox the next day.
Note the lack of information about it being just a poorly compiled rough draft that the author posted to the site for no good reason whatsoever.
He's a king now to these people.....
To all you @WesleyLHuff haters screaming into the void about his 'downfall' - this is how a KING acts.
Most of you pitchfork and torch wielding mob members aren't fit to be in the same room as Wes.
Dan McClellan CERTAINLY isn't. He's a rage baiting, envious opportunist that deserves a medal for his engagement farming and a rebuke for attempting to murder the career of a decent man that is a far better apologist than he is. What a sad and petty human.
Great job taking the high ground Dr. Kurschner!
2
2
159
Wes Huff has a sideline in weaponry. And a portion of the sales are used to support the "mission of equipping Christians".
dawsonknives.com/pages/apolo…
John Stuart Wilson retweeted
I don't buy the "drafts" excuse. What I see are highly-polished papers, despite non-plagiarism flaws. And several of them carry the Tyndale Seminary logo. Nobody posts an early draft instead of the final version. His "cloud storage" excuse sounds like a complete lie.
We has posted this same paper to his personal website.
Which is a blow to the gulllible who are buy his preposterous claim that what he posted to Academic.edu were just rough drafts that he wanted his peers to see but never turned in as part of his course work.
I found Wes Huff committing plagiarism in another paper. In his paper (left), "Forgiveness in Luke-Acts", (utoronto.academia.edu/Wesley…), he paraphrased a large chunk of Nathan Eubank's text in "A Disconcerting Prayer: On the Originality of LUke 23:34a" (right) in his conclusion.
2
122
John Stuart Wilson retweeted
One of the things he plagiarized from Wright was Wright’s own plagiarization. But worse, these plagiarists don’t research these borrowed arguments beyond, “sounds good to me” before hitting copypasta. They will even manipulate translations to fabricate arguments whole cloth.¹
Just a reminder: Even if @WesleyLHuff had plagiarized portions of his papers, that wouldn’t invalidate the data or arguments presented in them.
Copying someone else’s homework doesn’t suddenly make the answers wrong.
Plagiarism concerns academic integrity, not necessarily factual accuracy