Turn on thread page Beta

Are the Chinese cheating? watch

  • View Poll Results: Are the Chinese cheating?
    Yes
    204
    56.98%
    No
    154
    43.02%

    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by one2three_abc)
    If the child hasn't even started puberty at 16, I think it can be a strong case...and look at the websites mentioned on here. Chinese Government Websites had their ages as 13 a year ago...but they can age 3 years in the space of one?
    The evidence against them is very strong.
    How do people know if they've started puberty yet? I keep seeing this but don't understand where it's coming from... :confused:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If the 1994 date has got people then I wanna know what these dates mean -
    767,"易芷欣","女","1999-2-6",,,"湖南","首注"
    768,"尤 杰 ","男"," 1996-9-8",,,"湖南","首注"
    769,"曾庆鑫","男","1996-6-24",,,"湖南","首注"
    770,"曾 章 ","男"," 1997-3-31 ",,,"湖南","首注"
    771,"张方圆 ","女","1998-1-5",,,"湖南","首注"
    772,"张中华","男","1998-2-1",,,"湖南","首注"
    773,"赵 颖 ","女","1998-3-4",,,"湖南","首注"
    774,"周才松","男"," 1997-9-17",,,"湖南","首注"
    775,"周 程","女"," 1998-11-29 ",,,"湖南","首注"
    776,"周 乐 ","女"," 1998-10-6 ",,,"湖南","首注"
    777,"周翔隆","男"," 1998-9-3",,,"湖南","首注"
    778,"周 颖 ","女","1998-2-7",,,"湖南","首注"
    779,"周 璐","女","1999-1-1",,,"湖南","首注"
    780,"覃鹏超 ","男"," 1996-1-23",,,"湖南","首注83人"

    http://cache.baidu.com/c?m=9d78d513d...146&user=baidu

    Its from the above link.. Why is everyone so bothered about the people being born in 1994, when these say the people were born in 1999??
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stew1988)
    If the 1994 date has got people then I wanna know what these dates mean -
    767,"易芷欣","女","1999-2-6",,,"湖南","首注"
    768,"尤 杰 ","男"," 1996-9-8",,,"湖南","首注"
    769,"曾庆鑫","男","1996-6-24",,,"湖南","首注"
    770,"曾 章 ","男"," 1997-3-31 ",,,"湖南","首注"
    771,"张方圆 ","女","1998-1-5",,,"湖南","首注"
    772,"张中华","男","1998-2-1",,,"湖南","首注"
    773,"赵 颖 ","女","1998-3-4",,,"湖南","首注"
    774,"周才松","男"," 1997-9-17",,,"湖南","首注"
    775,"周 程","女"," 1998-11-29 ",,,"湖南","首注"
    776,"周 乐 ","女"," 1998-10-6 ",,,"湖南","首注"
    777,"周翔隆","男"," 1998-9-3",,,"湖南","首注"
    778,"周 颖 ","女","1998-2-7",,,"湖南","首注"
    779,"周 璐","女","1999-1-1",,,"湖南","首注"
    780,"覃鹏超 ","男"," 1996-1-23",,,"湖南","首注83人"

    http://cache.baidu.com/c?m=9d78d513d...146&user=baidu

    Its from the above link.. Why is everyone so bothered about the people being born in 1994, when these say the people were born in 1999??
    The dates come under 出生日期 which means date of birth...
    and maybe they aren't competing in the Olympics, this whole thing isn't about them .......
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moneyfaery)
    How do people know if they've started puberty yet? I keep seeing this but don't understand where it's coming from... :confused:
    Ok, yeah, we don't explicitly know, but look at them and tell me that 16 year old girls wouldn't have even started to develop breasts.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stew1988)
    If the 1994 date has got people then I wanna know what these dates mean -
    767,"易芷欣","女","1999-2-6",,,"湖南","首注"
    768,"尤 杰 ","男"," 1996-9-8",,,"湖南","首注"
    769,"曾庆鑫","男","1996-6-24",,,"湖南","首注"
    770,"曾 章 ","男"," 1997-3-31 ",,,"湖南","首注"
    771,"张方圆 ","女","1998-1-5",,,"湖南","首注"
    772,"张中华","男","1998-2-1",,,"湖南","首注"
    773,"赵 颖 ","女","1998-3-4",,,"湖南","首注"
    774,"周才松","男"," 1997-9-17",,,"湖南","首注"
    775,"周 程","女"," 1998-11-29 ",,,"湖南","首注"
    776,"周 乐 ","女"," 1998-10-6 ",,,"湖南","首注"
    777,"周翔隆","男"," 1998-9-3",,,"湖南","首注"
    778,"周 颖 ","女","1998-2-7",,,"湖南","首注"
    779,"周 璐","女","1999-1-1",,,"湖南","首注"
    780,"覃鹏超 ","男"," 1996-1-23",,,"湖南","首注83人"

    http://cache.baidu.com/c?m=9d78d513d...146&user=baidu

    Its from the above link.. Why is everyone so bothered about the people being born in 1994, when these say the people were born in 1999??
    Because those gymnasts weren't the ones breaking the rules in the olympics.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by one2three_abc)
    Ok, yeah, we don't explicitly know, but look at them and tell me that 16 year old girls wouldn't have even started to develop breasts.
    That is a slight misnomer because excessive training as in the case with young gymnasts does have the effect of delaying puberty to a degree - but, as has been said before, you would be surprised if you were told Ke Hexin was 14, let alone 16.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leannsc)
    Don't pretend to know everything in advance mate. Mr. God

    Even if the age limit is 14, you'll say oh look Chinese is cheating, they can't be 14 they are no more than 10!:rolleyes:
    The evidence is compelling though, isn't it? Not onyl can se see the physicality of the competitors, but a number of the Chinese girls were issued brand new passports recently, which could be considered odd. Speeches made about them with different ages which corroborate have also been made.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I did find the supposedly 'hacked' data to be interesting. But how can we verify if it's true?

    You may argue it's evident with the Chinese government's misdemeanor. But the Chinese government's censorships are often overly sensitive. They censor things that not only damage their political image but also Chinese national pride. They may see these articles as attacks on Chinese nationalism.

    In regards to physical features, I doubt anyone who posted here are qualified to judge. Children's build does vary from race to race. It requires certain physiologist knowledge to do it scientifically.

    It's up to professionals to judge on this issue and validate the evidence. But somehow I feel people are ignoring the judgment hence why I said 'reckless speculations'.

    Edit: Also, I don't think it's fair to extend the suspicion over to the other Chinese participants. They worked hard and they don't deserve people to cast unjustified views on them.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bikerx23)
    You're clearly not paying attention - the fireworks weren't filmed before they were computer generated.
    So the fireworks were generated then filmed? And the ones in the opening ceremonies were the filmed ones? From an article a friend pasted to me, the fireworks we saw were 'filmed'. Maybe BBC should be more coherent.

    (Original post by bikerx23)
    Well - it's not based on appearances, there is an increasing amount of paperwork stating they are underage.
    However, the argument that most people make is I SAW THEM AND THEY DON'T LOOK 16. That is faulty reasoning. BUT I admit the Chinese gov't needs to step up and be more honest. With time, hopefully this will happen.

    (Original post by one2three_abc)
    Not really. It was Americans who came up with the evidence.
    I never said the British media. There's also been a ton of bad press coverage about Tibet and 'freeing Tibet'. Something that I read yesterday: America should first be 'freed' to the aboriginals before Tibet is 'freed', as Tibet has belonged to China for a great number of years more than America to 'Americans'.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by one2three_abc)
    Well it's not my fault that you can't accept that what they do is wrong, whatever the rules.
    And as a matter of fact, I though the age limit was 14 years old. While watching the gymnastics all I could think of was, "are they really 14?" So yeah, I can say I thought there was something dodgy even then.
    You spoke as if it was a truth already been proven.

    http://2008.people.com.cn/GB/126916/127783/7659375.html
    The oldest girl in left first of 2,3,4 pictures is already 20 and you might think she's only about 12.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by one2three_abc)
    Ok, yeah, we don't explicitly know, but look at them and tell me that 16 year old girls wouldn't have even started to develop breasts.
    You're kidding, right? I don't exactly have HUGE chests when wrapped in my tight ballet leotard...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Btw, if the Chinese government is really involved in this 'conspiracy'. Then they surely did a poor job. They should have edited the DOB long ago and not do a makeshift job. Hence further raises questions whether if the Chinese government is truly involved here.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leannsc)
    You spoke as if it was a truth already been proven.

    http://2008.people.com.cn/GB/126916/127783/7659375.html
    The oldest girl in left first of 2,3,4 pictures is already 20 and you might think she's only about 12.
    Well I take information posted on the Chinese Government website as truth...shame they've wiped the information as it shows them to be corrupt.

    (Original post by moneyfaery)
    You're kidding, right? I don't exactly have HUGE chests when wrapped in my tight ballet leotard...
    But they don't have any.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TSRreader)
    Btw, if the Chinese government is really involved in this 'conspiracy'. Then they surely did a poor job. They should have edited the DOB long ago and not do a makeshift job. Hence further raises questions whether if the Chinese government is truly involved here.
    Yes, they should have, but they didn't. They weren't quick enough to realise that archived articles could still be accessed and looked at. They may have even thought that people wouldn't be able to read their language either.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moneyfaery)
    So the fireworks were generated then filmed? And the ones in the opening ceremonies were the filmed ones? From an article a friend pasted to me, the fireworks we saw were 'filmed'. Maybe BBC should be more coherent.
    The fireworks were real only what you saw on TV was pre-recorded for the security of the helicopter. People outside the stadium had photes to prove it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moneyfaery)
    So the fireworks were generated then filmed? And the ones in the opening ceremonies were the filmed ones? From an article a friend pasted to me, the fireworks we saw were 'filmed'. Maybe BBC should be more coherent.
    The footprint shaped fireworks that they showed pictures of during the opening ceremony going off in a line across beijing were computer generated, i.e. they made up the video on a computer. They claimed to have also set off fireworks in the same locations but that hasn't been verified as far as I've seen.
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sit...&sectionId=674
    have an array of articles discussing the matter.

    However, the argument that most people make is I SAW THEM AND THEY DON'T LOOK 16. That is faulty reasoning. BUT I admit the Chinese gov't needs to step up and be more honest. With time, hopefully this will happen.
    And most people are being idiots about it. The important thing is that there's documented evidence of cheating having taken place - and if this is the case it's, clearly, not acceptable.

    I never said the British media. There's also been a ton of bad press coverage about Tibet and 'freeing Tibet'. Something that I read yesterday: America should first be 'freed' to the aboriginals before Tibet is 'freed', as Tibet has belonged to China for a great number of years more than America to 'Americans'.
    Tibet has only been ruled by the Han majority chinese since after the second world war, if I remember correctly. Those arguments are only smokescreens anyway - anyone with knowledge will see that America has since realised the mistake of its early ways.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Minor correction - they weren't pre-recorded, they were computer generated. But the rest of what you say is true - it was "logistically impossible" to film those fireworks from the helicopter, and there were real fireworks which looked the same as the CGI ones.
    I don't see why people are making such a big deal about this, it's a very minor issue, and in getting caught up in it we ignore more important ones.

    Edit: D'oh, been said
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by one2three_abc)
    Yes, they should have, but they didn't. They weren't quick enough to realise that archived articles could still be accessed and looked at. They may have even thought that people wouldn't be able to read their language either.
    I am quite sure they should have realised this at least. Especially with recent Tibet issues, they would have been more alert to anything that can lead to damage on their image. In addition, they have notorious reputation in monitoring their internet database. I just find very hard to believe that they can leave such an obvious evidence to this kind of scandal under the above mentioned conditions.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Heres another statistic excluding gold medals won by China in sports requiring judges they trail the US by 3 gold medals. And its not too hard for a communist regime to sway things in their favour on home soil.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    yeah they are, and so what. I'm sure we'll be using tricks of our own in four years time.
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.