Citation Needed for You(Tube)? - How to not be a plagiarist
Cass Eris | 9 Dec. 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4jAyJDc8T4
3:50 "the original idea still belongs to the other author"
Ideas are private property?
No.
Now, if you were in fact doing this video for Academic essays, fine, Academia have their quirks, and that may be one of them. My quarrel is not with you, it's with whoever sent me your video into the feed, in that case. The following only concerns you, if you had my case or cases like mine in mind.
However, legally in an essay directed to the public at large, this cannot be a proper requirement.
At least in France, there is no such thing as copyright for ideas. For texts, or for instructions how to build machine or mix medications, yes, but not for ideas.
Let me give an example. I have an interest in Young Earth Creationist recalibration of carbon 14 dating. As a Young Earth Creationist, and also as taking an interest in the technical stuff of science.
After Fall of Troy, 1179 BC, I hold the carbon 14 content has been c. 100 pmC with minor variations in the atmosphere.
Before that, back to the Flood, I believe one can get nodes that link some Biblical event to some archaeological and carbon dated item or items. Flood, Biblical event( in the chronology of the Roman Martyrology* in 2958 BC (Jesus born 1 BC/2957 after the Flood)) links to carbon date 39 000 BP pr 37 000 BC as per the carbon date of the tephra from Campi Flegrei.
Now, I have on occasion credited the video from which I know the tephra from Campi Flegrei is 39 000 BP in carbon years probably of the Cambridge halflife, but I don't feel an urge to link to that video exactly every time I mention that 39 000 BP "oh, that's the carbon date of the Flood" in an essay (essay here referring to the medium of Montaigne and Chesterton, not to the kind of Academic papers that give a certain number of Academic credits, OK).
Similarily, I know that Genesis 14 mentions the locality En-Gedi under the name of Asason-Tamar, and this would be the chalcolithic inhabitation of En-Gedi at its latest. I don't feel an urge to credit Osgood every time I mention this, or, since he didn't give the carbon date 3500 BC, that 1935 BC (Abraham was c. 80 in Genesis 14, and born in 2015 BC in the Roman Martyrology, sorry, 2016 BC, since Christ is born 1 BC) actually is carbon dated as 3500 BC.
I have the 3500 BC date from an Israeli archaeologist who isn't making the connexion to Genesis 14, since he is not a Christian, nor a Jewish actual believer (like Finkelstein is also an unbeliever).
This would be inacceptable in Academia, I know, but it is also inacceptable for Academia to swamp general culture and prevent me from:
- either writing essays
- or making a living off them.
Now, the thing is, if someone simply wanted the original reference for my taking the carbon date of En-Geddi to the Biblical chronology date for Genesis 14, the original reference is actually myself.
Osgood offered no carbon dates, since he didn't believe in re-calibrating carbon 14, but in carbon 14 being totally unreliable.
The Israeli Archaeologist just offered the carbon date (and other facts) about chalcolithic En-Gedi and made no reference to the Bible. He did not believe in re-calibrating carbon 14 either, he believed that the Cambridge calibration extended back even further than the Fall of Troy.
That original research is mine. And I am denied getting both credited and paid for it, and for calculated probable years between Genesis 14 back to Babel (Göbekli Tepe) or on to Joseph in Egypt (crediting Djoser with being his pharao), simply because some guys cannot get around my offer of republishing my essays as they are, on paper, then asking me for the references they think they need, then helping me to find the Israeli archaeologist again, so that reference can be added to Osgood, then proceed to the printing press.
* For a very soon upcoming feast.
No comments:
Post a Comment