Plagiarising Science Fraud

Plagiarising Science Fraud
Newly Discovered Facts, Published in Peer Reviewed Science Journals, Mean Charles Darwin is a 100 Per Cent Proven Lying, Plagiarising Science Fraudster by Glory Theft of Patrick Matthew's Prior-Published Conception of the Hypothesis of Macro Evolution by Natural Selection
Showing posts with label The Darwin Industry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Darwin Industry. Show all posts

Saturday 26 June 2021

THE CORRUPT DARWIN INDUSTRY AND ITS NOMINALS

 

By their proven fact-resisting behaviour, some members of the Darwin Industry and some of its followers are engaged in what amounts to science fraud, fraudulent historical revisionist behaviours and repeated harassment in several ways, including but not limited to the following examples of academic misconduct:

(1) Fact denial by brute censorship of independently verifiable facts.

(2) Dismissing independently verifiable facts as a conspiracy theory.

(3) Dismissing facts by refusing to engage with them.

(4) Dismissing major groups of verifiable facts by gleefully disproving a single error elsewhere.

(5) Inventing completely made-up fake stories about Patrick Matthew and/or his book.

(6) Repeat plagiarism of my research, amounting to academic fraud, harassment, and serious academic misconduct.

(7) Publishing misinformation about me, my accredited academic qualifications, research findings, peer reviewers, editors, and professional publishers.

(8) Repeat workplace harassment by way of multiple malicious poison-pen emails to managers and colleagues (serious academic misconduct and possibly criminal behaviour).

(9) Harassment by malicious correspondence to the wider community of local groups, government organisations, charities, funders, editors, publishers, and journalists (possibly criminal behaviour and serious academic misconduct).

Get the facts on PatrickMatthw.com


(10) Harassment by cyberstalking on social media, malicious editing of Wikipedia pages and creating malicious blogsites publishing multiple misinformation falsehoods (possibly criminal behaviour and serious academic misconduct).

Friday 20 April 2018

Darwin Industry real ale

Photography (c) Andy Sutton
No matter how many pints of this good beer one drinks, it cannot transmute a prior published theory into one of Darwin's origin. Moreover, following responsible drinking guidelines one would have to give the Darwin Industry a considerable amount of cash, brain and liver damage for it to change Darwin's many proven lies about the true originator of natural selection - Patrick Matthew - into the "truth" as perceived only by a deranged Darwin worshipper.



+ +

Monday 8 August 2016

Greater power of occupancy in the literature of lies, myths and other falsehoods strangles veracity



A lot of the environment is in fact organic life itself.

The originator of macroevolution by natural slection, Patrick Matthew (1831) wrote about what he coined the "natural process of selection", In part he explained as evolution by natural selection with regard to what he called a "power of occupancy". Matthew used this example to explain that a tree might in fact grow better outside its "natural" environment (the soil and climate in which it is found in nature) but is prevented from doing so by other tree species that would overwhelm it through having a "greater power of occupancy".  And he backed up his claim with real examples, This point was picked up by Jameson, So much for the myth that Matthew never backed up his ideas with examples of observations from nature. 

William Jameson was a botanist, deputy surgeon-general and superintendent of the East India Company. He cited NTA in 1853 noting Matthew's original findings that trees could grow better outside their "natural environments". 

 In 1854, the year after Jameson cited Matthew's original discovery, William Hooker (friend of Darwin, Mentor of Wallace, and father of Darwin's best friend Joseph Hooker) who was empowered to make such decisions for the East India Company from Kew, blocked his application for promotion. See my book Nullius in Verba for the fully referenced details.

Darwin and Wallace would later replicate Matthew's original prior-published ideas - including replicating his original explanatory analogies - and claim them as their own. To date, their deceptions have a greater power of occupancy in the literature than veracity, because Darwin's and Wallace's newly discovered lies about the non-existence of any prior-readership of Mathew's book are being strangled by a hostile environment known as The Darwin Industry.

The evidence to support this is in my latest peer reviewed article: http://www.nauka-a-religia.uz.zgora.pl/index.php/pl/czasopismo/46-fag-2015/921-fag-2015-art-05 where you can lean just how many people in fact did read Matthew's ideas (because they are newly discovered to have cited Matthew's book pre-1858)  - and their relationshops to Dariwn and Walace - before that pair replicatred them in 1858.