Wednesday, 22 February 2017
Tuesday, 21 February 2017
Monday, 20 February 2017
Ignoring completely the accepted Arago Ruling on first and foremost priority for a discovery going to whoever had their original discovery published first, the Royal Society awarded the Darwin medal, and its most prestigious Copley medal, to Wallace. Why? For replicating Matthew's (1831) prior-published theory in 1858 and for claiming it as his own. If that was not a corrupt act by the Royal Society then what is?
No one is ever going to win the Royal Society's Copley Medal now - never mind one of its Darwin Medals - for originally proving Matthew's book, containing the full theory of natural selection, was read and cited by Darwin's and Wallace's friends, influencers and editors and their influencer's influencers before Darwin and Wallace replicated Matthew's original conception and claimed to have done so independently of it. Just Google "On Knowledge Contamination" (put it in those speech quotes - its a simple Big Data trick) to find the peer reviewed truth of what has been discovered on this topic.
How can we ask the scientific community to stand up to Trump's anti-vaccination and anti-global warming claptrap when its most esteemed institution is corrupt?
In 1860, 157 years ago, Matthew wrote two letters - both published in the Gardener's Chronicle of that year - claiming his priority.
Darwin wrote to admit Matthew got the entire thing first - 27 years in published print (in 1831) before he and Wallace replicated the theory in their papers presented before the Linnean Society n 1858. Yet Darwin continued to call it "my theory" and lied by claiming no naturalist/no one at all had read Matthew's original ideas. Darwin wrote those falsehoods even though Matthew had prior- informed him of two naturists who did read his ideas pre-1858.
We know knewly know (Google 'Nullius in verba Darwin's greatest secret' to get the facts) that many of Darwin's and Wallace's friends, associates and influencers cited Matthew's book and mentioned his orignal ideas pre-1858 in published print. Selby - the editor of Wallace's 1855 Sarawak paper cited Matthew's 1831 book in 1842. Chambers' - Wallace's greatest influencer and Darwin's associate and Correspondent pre-1858 (he authored the Vestiges of Creation in 1844) cited Matthew's book in 1832. there are many more I could mention.
Nevertheless - even despite what has been newly discovered about Matthew's prior-influence- the Arago Ruling was ignored by The Royal Society.
Before we can take on the likes of Donald Trump's tweets that vaccinations cause autism and global warming is a Chinese conspiracy (here), our esteemed institutions of science must first put themselves in order. We need an inquiry into the corruption that is the so-called Darwin Industry.
Sunday, 19 February 2017
@Criminotweet Looks like the v small book was a publisher's compression of other stuff. Not so much corrupt as lazy and dumb, I suspect— Brian Deer (@deerbrian) February 19, 2017
Saturday, 18 February 2017
Friday, 17 February 2017
Sunday, 12 February 2017
++Happy Darwin Day SUCKERS!— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) February 12, 2017
2: https://t.co/DotiWqaMkbhttps://t.co/xBGGof5eY7#Darwin #PatrickMatthew pic.twitter.com/lj7s35Dwc4
And to raise questions about research integrity. https://t.co/yksOVd2tEX— Robert Dingwall (@rwjdingwall) February 12, 2017
Saturday, 11 February 2017
Saturday, 7 January 2017
Friday, 30 December 2016
Tuesday, 27 December 2016
Friday, 23 December 2016
'Subsequent to his successful manipulation of Hooker and Lyell in 1858, to ensure that Wallace did not get his priority over him, the following year, and just weeks before defending his priority to Baden Powell in 1859, Darwin writes to Hooker on Christmas Day, 1859, to say that he has always strongly felt that no one should defend their priority (Darwin 1859b). Seemingly, this most weird letter is meant to be both appreciative and self-flattering that he manipulated Hooker and Lyell to do so on his behalf, even if that meant unethical conduct on their respective parts. We know that Darwin had a weirdly unethical mindset when it came to scientific priority, but in this case, one might wonder whether perhaps he had started just a tad too early on the mince pies, rum source, sherry and port, or perhaps he was using something stronger? Or perhaps there was simply something far more profoundly wrong with the moral wiring of his mind.'
Darwin was a serial liar who was in fact obsessed with slyly stealing priority from others for his own glorification. Years earlier he started a prolific letter campaign to try to get Royal Society and British Association for Advancement of Science tore-write the rules on priority for discovery changed so that mere replicators like he could claim priority for the prior-published discoveries of lesser known scientists. Those independently verifiable facts are here.
Below, you can see the facts of how Darwin blatantly and clearly lied in order to plagiarise by glory theft Patrick Matthew's original ans prior published conception of macroevolution natural selection.
The peer reviewed facts of Charles Darwin's lies and independently verifiable evidence he committed plagiarism, to effectively claim independent discovery of Matthew's prior-published hypotheses of the process of macro evolution by natural slection, can now be read in learned journals:
3. Far more details, evidence and context can be found in 'Nullius in Verba': Here
Thursday, 22 December 2016
Wednesday, 21 December 2016
Monday, 19 December 2016
++Santa has a very special video message indeed, from the North Pole. He made it specifically for Mr Charles Darwin: https://t.co/LYpPdcgQ57 pic.twitter.com/ff6tdvpeYo— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) December 19, 2016
@Criminotweet @DISSENTOFMAN @TakeThatDarwin @royalsociety @DarwinsWeasel @ARWallace @DawkinsDog @RichardDawkins Good luck Mike. Greetings.— Teesside SitP (@TeessideSitP) December 20, 2016
The words you are reading here are 100% proven to exist. Look 100 times - count the number of times they disappear.: https://t.co/WOiVuLvCho— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) December 20, 2016