Question: What is more likely:
a) Getting the prior-published theory of natural selection from your editor (Selby) who read it in Patrick Matthew's (1831) book and then cited it years earlier (originally discovered by Sutton 2014) - or
(b) Discovering it inside your head whilst suffering from malarial brain fever after that same editor published your (Sarawak) paper on natural selection?
Darwinists are proven stupid because they still believe Wallace's fairy story is true and think the answer is b. And from that cause they have hung his picture above the plagiarist and serial liar - Charles Darwin - in the Natural History Museum in London - at tax payer's expense! How mad is that?
 |
| An Exhibition of Stupidity |
Proper science @Sciencesharenew focuses on anomalies and paradoxes that dis-confirm accepted 'knowledge beliefs': http://t.co/SBIihYvf7E
— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) September 6, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment
Spam will be immediately deleted. Other comments warmly welcome.
On this blogsite you are free to write what you think in any way you wish to write it. However, please bear in mind it is a published public environment. Stalkers, Harassers and abusers who seek to hide behind pseudonyms may be exposed for who they actually are.
Anyone publishing threats, obscene comments or anything falling within the UK Anti-Harassment and the Obscene Communications Acts (which carry a maximum sentence of significant periods of imprisonment) should realize Google blogs capture the IP addresses of those who post comments. From there, it is a simple matter to know who you are, where you are commenting from, reveal your identity and inform the appropriate police services.