Degrees of fraudulence

We have errors in citing the wrong source; we have misleading by citing irrelevant sources; and we have the practice of citing sources that contradict you - citing them as if they supported you. I call that "reversing" or "flipping" a citation. The AHA has not gotten around to recognizing this as a problem, but it's making its way into the press.

The embattled Professor Churchill seems to be having just that kind of problem:

None of the sources that Churchill cites make any mention of “a military infirmary…quarantined for smallpox.” None of the sources Churchill cites make any mention of U.S. Army soldiers even being in the area of the pandemic, much less being involved with it in any way. Churchill’s own sources make it clear that Fort Clark was not an Army garrison. It was a remote trading outpost that was privately owned and built by the American Fur Company, and manned by a handful of white traders. It was not an Army fort, nor did it contain soldiers. Not being an Army fort, it did not contain a “post surgeon” who told Indians to “scatter” and spread the disease. Churchill’s own sources make all of this abundantly clear.
Have a look.

Now have a look at my Stephen Sears collection of posts, starting with this and this. Use the handy Search box at the top left of this page to find more.

Don't pity the liars.