舟山海钓旅游 嵊泗海钓最佳时间 海钓游行程安排

百度 刘元春教授代表人民大学党委书记靳诺的发言指出，在一带一路议题上，中国人民大学具备厚重与扎实的研究积累，在过去两年里，人民大学一带一路调研团共走访了40多个国家以及中国国内上百个县市，重阳金融研究院举办过多次大型论坛。

A spat between prominent anti-fraud campaigner Fang Zhouzi and high-profile blogger Zhou Xiaoping over an online essay about life in the US has gone viral and has allegedly resulted in the closure of Fang's China-based social media accounts.

Fang had accused Zhou, 33, of factual inaccuracies in an essay he wrote entitled "Broken dreams in the US," published on October 16 in Reference News, a daily newspaper under the Xinhua News Agency.

In the essay, one of three the paper published by Zhou the same day, he described differences between lives in China and the US, including accommodation, employment and commodity prices.

"The dream that the US has presented to the world has been shattered in reality … what China is depicting is a more advanced and equal 'Chinese dream,'" Zhou's essay concluded.

In response, Fang published a riposte Tuesday, highlighting what he said were factual inaccuracies in Zhou's essay. He wrote that Zhou had been "sleepwalking through America," and lying about the reality of the US. Fang refuted nearly all the facts and figures Zhou cited, and said that one only needs to look online to see that his claims about the US were wrong.

"The minimum wage of the US was $7.25 per hour in 2009 … Did Zhou dream about the $3-5 average hourly wage in the US?" wrote Fang.

Fang, 47, a former biochemist, has long campaigned against alleged cases of academic fraud and what he perceives as pseudoscience. He has often been embroiled in controversy in the past.

His rebuttal essay disappeared from Internet sites, including Baidu and Sina, and his social media accounts from providers such as Tencent have been closed.

Fang told the Global Times via e-mail that he was surprised at the shutting down of his accounts.

"I provided facts to refute [Zhou's] article ... Politics is not involved [in the debate]," Fang said, adding he is going to rely on overseas websites in the future.

Zhou became particularly high-profile as a patriotic blogger after attending an arts forum in Beijing on October 15, which was also attended by Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Zhou told the Global Times Wednesday that he stands by the facts in his essay and that many overseas students had contacted him to say they agreed with him.

He said he did not know if the account closures were related to Fang's reply to his essay.

"It remains open to question if Net users' speculation necessarily stands. Many others, opinion leaders included, have publicly criticized or even defamed me on Sina Weibo, but they are still active online," Zhou told the Global Times.

"I believe Fang and I can have an academic discussion on the topic. We may simply have chosen statistics from different states or different years," Zhou said.

However, other prolific bloggers considered by many as conservative-leaning have chosen to back Fang this time.

Scholar Sima Nan wrote on his Sina Weibo that Fang corrected the untrue parts of the story by being "rational as he always has been." He said he hoped that Zhou can clarify his stance. "Isn't it a good thing for people to recognize the flaws of a fighter? Will it not help to spread a story on positive energy by eradicating the fatal mistakes in it?" Sima added.

Wu Danhong, an assistant professor at the China University of Political Science and Law, wrote that Fang's right to speak should be respected and no different opinions should be forced out.

Others hope that there is room for writers such as Zhou and Fang to both express their opinions.

A Beijing-based scholar, who requested anonymity, told the Global Times that it is inappropriate to rule Fang out of the discussion when both his and Zhou's opinions can be accepted by society.

"It is right to be express patriotism in one's writing, but a good statement will be discredited with unscientific evidence," said the scholar.

An editorial in the Qianjiang Evening News Wednesday, which was later removed from their website, had called for tolerant debate and more voices to be heard.

"A benign environment should offer them equal chances to debate each other and show respect to bystanders seeking truth. We don't necessarily want to see a winner, but we do hope that both Zhou and Fang are needed and tolerated with their flaws," it said. 

(Editor:Ma Xiaochun、Liang Jun)