de Beer, Dawkins and the Dysology Hypothesis

The dreadful scholarship of eminent Darwinists, who have for the past 155 years deified the serial liar Charles Darwin, confirms the Dysology Hypothesis that unchecked poor scholarship in any field creates an intellectual spiral of decline. 

Credulous Darwinist belief in Darwin's lie that Matthew's ideas had not been read before 1860 enabled the eminent Darwin 'expert'  Royal Society Darwin Medal winner de Beer (1962) to write the absolute shameless claptrap that no one at all had read Matthew's book before 1860 and Richard Dawkins (2010 in Bryson) to ridiculously blame Matthew for not trumpeting his heretical, seditious, and scientifically taboo deduced ideas from the rooftops when it was against their own rules, created following William Pitt's 'gagging Acts' (see Secord 2003), for scientific societies such as the Royal Society and British Association for Advancement of Science to discuss them. 

Weirdly, deBeer and Dawkins - like so many 'expert' and renowned Darwinists - writing with such presumed authority on Matthew seem, not to have read his second letter in the Gardener's Chronicle (1860) where he told Darwin of a naturalist who had read his original ideas but dared not teach them for fear of pillory punishment! 

The irrefutable facts of their past and current behaviour suggests that anyone calling themselves a 'Darwinist' is seemingly going to be intellectually incurable of researching and writing any kind of veracious history of the discovery of natural selection by a man not called Darwin.The pseudo-scholarly shame of it! We should not really expect Darwinists to admit this, of course.