The title above is an alternative for the posting which this note follows, as Google have changed (on their site) the title as we wrote it — perhaps they have received a complaint? — missing out ours entirely; for the full details of Jim Perrin’s ‘PhD’, as far as we have so far discovered, please do read the information in the preceding post. However, the question remains: if Jim Perrin’s PhD is spurious a complaint would be understandable as the complainant would not wish more attention to be drawn to any possible deception: proof, on the other hand, would settle the matter…
In a note concerning Jim Perrin’s academic history we have read that he was ‘a graduate in English from Bangor University.’ This is true — he was awarded a 2:1 — and it further stated that he was ‘a PhD student’. Although the implication was that he had remained at Bangor, it was not the truth — actually he left.
However, nowhere has been seen any further reference to Jim Perrin having finally obtained his doctorate. He has certainly implied that he did (on the back of one of his books is the information that he used material found in the course of his PhD research); and he has deliberately encouraged others to believe it — the Scottish author David Craig for one, whom we quoted in the ‘Banff blog’.
Jim Perrin, by first ‘implying’ — as we think he did — and later allowing his ‘implication’ to become embedded as ‘a fact’ (he was, after all, featured in 2006 as ‘Dr. Jim Perrin’ on the Banff site with a photograph and details of his location), has — in our opinion — clearly demonstrated with this example alone what we believe to be his deceit: his ‘modus operandi’. Continue reading