Tiffiny Tung

 - a Professor, but also a liar -

To whom it concerns


(I hope every reader is an UNBIASED person of integrity)

The letter below (now slightly altered) was sent to about 30 academics.


An unjust individual is in a constant state of unrest, always dissatisfied, and his own enemy.

(free after Socrates)


Mid-August 2022 I promised someone to email him about the situation regarding Tung and Scaffidi. Well, the situation changed considerably, because on 13-Aug-2022 I received an email from Justin Jennings, an acedemic archaeologist, in which he writes (mind you, I am also blaming Justin, although he is just the messenger, he let me down because I repeatedly asked him to ask Scaffidi and Tung HOW I am supposed to have bullied T and S; more details below):

I did talk to Scaffidi and Tung about this years ago, and think there was a point in 2012 where the [Beringa?] photos would have been presented and a different path taken. It was not your intention, but they felt bullied in those early correspondence and felt it was best to end the correspondence (MY emphases and [addition]).

Unfortunately, It now proves that Justin has been lied to by Tung and Scaffidi, years ago (thus long before their 2020-falsification). They manipulated him without offering him ANY proof of me bullying them. Disturbingly, Jennings did not ask for any evidnce! He took their lies for granted. I take this accusation of "bullying" extremely seriously, having been a teacher for 32 years and hating bullying and bulliers. What I also hate are liars like Tung and Scaffidi (see below). I spent a hot summer morning to re-read all the 2012-emails that I sent to S and T and their replies.  NOWHERE could I find anything indecent or disturbing from my side, NOWHERE !! I include three emails (copied from my emails stored in the MailStore program in which I CANNOT change anything; and I have ALL the emails available). S and T are also cowards, because they did not have the guts to inform me in 2012 why they simultaneously (!) ended their correspondence with me. Why did they not have the guts? Because there was not ANY good reason, and NO proof at all.

But I know why! I also know why Tung persuaded Scaffidi to also end our constructive correspondence. You can read in the PDF (Tung email 1) that I only questioned the inconsistency of her remarks (in her paper and in her email). Apparently she did not like that. And THAT is the reason why she ditched me and persuaded her student Scaffidi (then Koontz) to do the same, while Koontz did NOT have ANY reason at all (but she uncritically accepted the lies by her professor, Tung). Immediately after their silence I tried to reach both of them several times (see PDFs: Tung email 2 and Scaffidi email 1). But in vain. For ten years I did not know WHY those cowards abruptly ended the correspondence. And after ten years they both keep on lying, at the cost of the integrity of Justin and me. Me bullying??? I find their attitude most disgusting, but I do not need any apologies from them; their apologies are considered by me to be meaningless.

Above all, I find it most disgusting of S and T that by lying to Justin they pushed Justin into a corner where he does NOT belong, discrediting him, forcing him via peer-pressure to accept that I was the bad guy. In many, many emails Justin most patiently tried to defend S and T during the 2020-2022 battle I had with S and T. Finally, the lies of S and T caused Justin to end the correspondence with me, which would never have happened, if I would have known about the "bullying" lie. THAT I am also extremely upset about.


However, after August 2022 I repeatedly asked Jennings to ask Scaffidi and Tung HOW I was supposed to have bullied T and S. Unfortunately, apparently peer pressure was too heavy, and Jennings finally emailed me that he never asked T and S about their lies. Jennings thus accepts that I am the bad guy and that T and S are not lying.

Now, in order to put things in the correct perspective:

Justin Jennings suspects that my interpretation - that Fig. 3 by Scaffidi-Tung is a falsification - is correct. Their Fig. 3 is a falsification, because Jennings confirms to me that there are no weapons visible in their falsification.

Justin Jennings confirms to me that the authors (T and S)  should have noted in their caption that they were manipulating the image by retracing over it digitally.

Justin Jennings informed me about the lies about me spread by Tung and Scaffidi, but Jennings did not have the guts to ask HOW I am supposed to have bullied T and S (I still do not know).

Justin Jennings agrees with me that Scaffidi-Tung's "Erratum" is inadequate and that there are NO original photos to be seen in their Erratum.

Most importantly: Justin Jennings agrees with me that the original photos of their Fig. 3 should in any case have been shared with me (Yet I am still not allowed to see those original photos).


Despite all the evidence, also Jennings  denies  that Scaffidi / Tung intentionally falsified their "photograph" (Fig. 3). Now my paper about Boulder AP3-065 in TRACCE proves that Tung / Scaffidi indeed  intentionally  falsified their "photograph" (Fig. 3). This new paper can be accessed via my Publications web page.

Moreover, most important is the fact that - during almost three years after 2020 - Scaffidi and Tung never refuted my accusations (published in Van Hoek 2020). Thus, my claims that they intentionally published false information must be correct. If somebody accused me of falsifying photos and I knew that would be a false accusation, I would certainly defend myself. So why did Scaffidi / Tung not defend themselves? Because they knew what they did wrong! Besides, I still insist to see their original photos, which is mandatory whenever Scaffidi and Tung decide to refute my claims.


If you - and especially you, Justin - will have the courage to carefully read my evidence presented in my new AP3-065 paper, then you must admit that I am right. And admitting that someone is right, is a matter of integrity. I hope there is something left of anybody's integrity. We have constructively been working together for five years, but despite your confessions (see above), I am almost certain that even you - Justin - will not support me openly [because of peer pressure!]. You never openly suported or defended me towards the two liars: T and S; you did not have the guts.


A summary

Tung and Scaffidi are cowards, because they simultaneously ditched me in 2012 without informing me and lying about me afterwards.

Tung and Scaffidi are liars because I never wrote anything "bullying" to them. And I have the evidence! And they are also cowards for not providing solid (and not falsified) evidence.

Tung and Scaffidi are liars, because they published falsified material (2020: Fig. 3ab). Thus they lie to their readers.

Tung and Scaffidi are liars, because they do not admit that their "photos" (2020: Fig. 3ab) are false,  neither in their  meaningless "Erratum".

Tung and Scaffidi are liars because they published a worthless "Erratum". Why?

Tung and Scaffidi are liars because they published worthless (not the original) photos in that "Erratum". Why? Because those original photos would prove me right.

Tung and Scaffidi are liars because they never shared the original photos I repeatedly asked for, but they were never ever shared with me. WHY?? Justin Jennings agrees with me that the original photos should in any case have been published  along with any manipulated photo !!!!!! Justin also agrees with me that their "Erratum" does not address at all any of the serious issues that I raised and that the photos in their "Erratum" definitely are not the original photos. He also agrees with me that their 2020-Fig. 3ab illustrations are not originals, but manipulations.


Unfortunately, other academics (like Streeter of Wiley and Prof. Trudy Turner, the editor) bought the lies by Tung and Scaffidi, without actually reading and accepting what I wrote several times, and thus they as well ditched me. Therefore, this CASE is CLOSED (for them) (which means that I do not expect an amended and honest Erratum to be published anymore), but NOT the problems I have with S and T.

Therefore, I will continue to expose T and S as liars and as unreliable "scientists", as I have done in my Beringa paper that I uploaded on 13-Aug-2022 (which I had to revise because in July 2023 Scaffidi objected [correctly] against me using a few of her copyrighted illustrations). I deleted those illustrations (which would even make my case stronger!) - also in other publications - and replaced them with my own illustrations, Also in later publications (see some examples below) I continued (and I will continue) to expose them as unreliable "scientists" (only regarding rock art!) and as manipulative liars, damaging and discrediting my person.


Van Hoek, M. 2020. False Information Concerning Majes Rock Art, Peru. In: TRACCE - Online Rock Art Bulletin, Italy.

Van Hoek, M. 2022. The Mislaid Beringa Petroglyph. A Missed Opportunity or a Misleading Missive? In: TRACCE - Online Rock Art Bulletin, Italy (revised). PDF at ResearchGate .

Van Hoek. M. 2023."Trophy" Heads in the Rock Art of North and South America". Book available as (revised) PDF only at ResearchGate.

Van Hoek, M. 2023. Majes Rock Art: Evaluating Scaffidi's 2018-Thesis. In: TRACCE - Online Rock Art Bulletin, Italy. PDF (revised) still available at ResearchGate.

Van Hoek, M. 2023. The "Camelines" of Toro Muerto; Majes Valley, Peru. In: TRACCE - Online Rock Art Bulletin, Italy (revised). PDF available at ResearchGate


Thank you for your attention,

Maarten van Hoek

Rock art researcher since 1975 (not an academic archaeologist)


A final piece of advice. If any (academic or not) scientist/researcher wishes to publish a study about the archaeology of the Majes Valley (and/or an adjacent valley and/or any other coastal area of the Desert Andes) which involves remarks about the rock art in those areas, it will be wise to first consult (and then to correctly refer to) the many publications about the rock art in those areas (see my Bibliography) (not pretening that I have all the knowledge, though). It may prevent making inexcusable errors or omissions regarding the rock art in those areas. This piece of advice especially applies to Prof. Tung and Prof. Scaffidi, who pretend to have sufficient knowledge of Majes rock art (while they have not!).
© Maarten van Hoek - Updated June - 2024
Mogelijk gemaakt door Webnode
Maak een gratis website. Deze website werd gemaakt met Webnode. Maak jouw eigen website vandaag nog gratis! Begin