Care to see how paradigm changing new discoveries upset history of science belief systems? .Check comments section: https://t.co/OocIGchKM0— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 30, 2016
Please click the title above for the latest blog post
Saturday, 30 July 2016
This is How Uncomfortable New Data Upsets the Credulous
Friday, 29 July 2016
What are Irrational Fact Denying Darwinists Afraid of? A Professor of Psychology Perhaps?
|Prof. Mark Griffiths (Ph.D)|
NOTE Not one single Darwiinite has yet dared to comment on Professor @DrMarkGriffiths blog on the New Data on Darwin https://t.co/MXoXca3eJU— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) July 29, 2016
Patrick Matthew was a Famous Chartist Leader. Lindley and Owen all Despised Chartists, Darwin Certainly Feared Them
Patrick Matthew, from whom Darwin plagiarized natural selection, was a Chartist leader. Darwin despised Chartists: https://t.co/dIPqFqucLV— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) July 29, 2016
For independently verifiable and peer reviewed newly discovered evidence of Darwin's more likely than not plagiarism. See: "On Knowledge Contamination"
Thursday, 28 July 2016
The Linnean Society has Dreadfully Biased History of Institutionalized Ignorance
To its shame, the linnean Society has a long history of dreadfully biased behaviour:— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) July 28, 2016
Psychology and Darwinite Irrational Fact Denial of the New Data
Selective memories: Charles Darwin, obsession, and Internet dating https://t.co/CtcpGWEfF9 via @DrMarkGriffiths— macroevolution.net (@Macroevo) July 26, 2016
Wednesday, 27 July 2016
World's Greatest Conspiracy Theory
NOTE: This is a parody. Reason suggests Darwin was a lying plagiarist.
World's most successful conspiracy theory is so cleverly camouflaged as veracity.https://t.co/FWBx2rHoWq pic.twitter.com/1eeefsNp5S— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) July 27, 2016
Sunday, 24 July 2016
Additional Information on Knowledge Contamination
My article 'On Knowledge Contamination' (Sutton 2016) reveals who really did read Matthew's book and the original ideas on natural selection in it before 1858 and their relationships to Darwin and Wallace, their friends and influencers and influencer's influencers - as opposed to the myths started by Darwin that no naturalists/no one whatsoever did so before Matthew brought his work to Darwin's attention in 1860.
In his notebook of books to read Darwin wrote in 1842 - in the same year he completed his first private essay on natural selection that he should read Vol 8 of the Gardener's Magazine. That volume contained Loudon's (1832) review of Matthew's book.
Darwin wrote: "March 12th Gardener’s Magaz. Vol 7th. & 8th. vol."
However, whilst this main volume ordering ran throughout the series, it must be added that each decade had a sub-order of volumes that began at vol 1 all over again. So we can see that volume VIII of 1832 is displayed as such:
We cannot know, but Darwin might have meant (though if he did he did not write it) that he wanted to read volumes 7 and 8 of the new 1840's decade - written as "new series". We can see how vol VIII of the new decade - "new series" - is displayed in 1842.
Darwin's lies after 1860 - when Matthew's first letter to the Gardener's Chronicle informed him of Loudon's review - and his complete lack of curiosity regarding the conveyance of that fact, and of the fact - conveyed in Matthew's second letter to the Gardener's Chronicle - that another naturalist had read his original ideas and feared pillory punishment were he to teach them, should be weighed in light of the fact that before his Origin of Species (Darwin 1859) was completed, Darwin - apparently - did own Vol. 8 of 1832. And owned it from 1838 - the year he opened his first private notebook on evolution). I've not established the veracity of this (if its true, it's not easily verifiable online) but Andrew Norman ( 2013) p. 173 writes with great exactness and certainty that Darwin owned these. Note however, that he tells us very clearly is only what is inside the front cover of Volume 7, of 1831 when (as his writing clearly shows he knows) Loudon's review is in Volume 8 of 1832:
Further Dysology attached to this story
At the time of writing a website of The University of South Carolina has confused the Gardener's Chronicle with the Gardener's Magazine
London: Longman, Rees, . . . 1831. Original glazed cloth. Purchased from the C. Warren Irvin, Jr. and Josie B. Irvin Endowment.
NOTE: Such mistakes are further confirmation of the Dysology Hypothesis.
Showing Scientists the Irrationality of Darwin Deification
It's not rocket science. But overturning irrational Darwin deification is arduous work: https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/tDIGpwbfuR— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) July 24, 2016
Saturday, 23 July 2016
How do we defrost Darwinites?
Discovery - or not as the case may be Could be genuine. Darwin was a bad speller after all.
How on Earth do we defrost frozen donkey Darwinites?— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 23, 2016
(2) Frozen Donkey Hypothesis: https://t.co/TnMtwezQbo
Darwin's lost diary discovered 1/2 burnt. Writes he hopes no one notices.the truth, which is https://t.co/LMpbVPMAh6 pic.twitter.com/EqbQ0V13Fn— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 23, 2016
Friday, 22 July 2016
Myths About Darwin (No, 4) The Darwin Got It but Matthew Never Extinction by Natural Selection Myth
(Stansfield, p. 31) Darwin wrote:
'I feel as if my book (Origin of Species) came half out of Sir Charles Lyell's brain.'
This is totally wrong. Darwin's Origin of Species was not published untill 1859. The closest Darwin got to writing what Stansfield claims is in an 1844 letter to Leonard Horner:
'I always feel as if my books came half out of Lyell’s brains & that I never acknowledge this sufficiently, nor do I know how I can, without saying so in so many words—for I have always thought that the great merit of the Principles, was that it altered the whole tone of one’s mind & therefore that when seeing a thing never seen by Lyell, one yet saw it partially through his eyes— it would have been in some respects better if I had done this less—but again excuse my long & perhaps you will think presumptuous discussion.'
We should expect as much complete nonsense because there is so much of it in the Darwin deification industry. So Stansfield confirms the Dysology hypothesis, and it is not long before examples pop out of his book as further confirmation of the general acceptance of falsehoods about Patrick Matthew's influence, and the contents of his 1831 book, by the scientific community.
Dysology about Matthew has facilitated the enabling environment that enabled Stansfield to to get away with writing so much more nonsense to be published for consumption as though it were true. And his completely erroneous nonsense is published by the prestigious Macmillan publishing house, no less!
Clearly Stanstead had no more read Darwin's original correspondence than he had carefully read Matthew's (1831) original book. Because on page 32 he writes:
'Matthew did not conceive of the role that natural selection could play in the extinction of species'
This is yet another Darwinite myth, told to enhance Darwin's reputation at the expense of the originator whose work he replicated. In reality, on page 381 of his 1831 book On Naval Timber, Matthew wrote:
Tuesday, 19 July 2016
Dear Royal Society About that Darwin Medal
.@royalsociety Can I win @TeessideSitP your "Darwin Medal" for originally proving it's namesake a liar & plagiarist? https://t.co/LMpbVPMAh6— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 19, 2016
Can Dr Sutton @Criminotweet @Dysology win the "Darwin Medal" for originally proving Darwin to be a liar & plagiarist?— Emilio Cervantes (@BiologiaPensamt) July 21, 2016
Make your guess...
Monday, 18 July 2016
You Can Delete but you Can't Hide: Because delete never means delete on the Internet
Check it out: https://t.co/tALARfQv2k pic.twitter.com/JNJtO8gjyA— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) July 18, 2016
Sunday, 17 July 2016
The Patrick Matthew Burial project is Unearthed
Find out all the newly excavated facts in my peer reviewed science paper: On Knowledge Contamination: New Data Challenges Claims of Darwin’s and Wallace’s Independent Conceptions of Matthew’s Prior-Published Hypothesis
THE PATRICK MATTHEW BURIAL PROJECT
Unearth the facts that have been deliberately buried these last 155 years : https://t.co/6K7Wm5UvfI pic.twitter.com/BJXzYXk19Q— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) July 17, 2016
The Tangled Web of the Darwin Deification Cult is Unravelliing
Rational Wiki for rational people— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) July 17, 2016
Wikipedia for irrational & corrupt fact deniers:
Take the poll. Take action.
Anyone care @DrMarkGriffiths about reach of fact denial tentacles of a weird science cult? https://t.co/PO4HLYU74Z— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) July 17, 2016
Saturday, 16 July 2016
A Poem On the Discovery of the Citing Seven
https://t.co/uOpDBsxlM8 pic.twitter.com/qrB3nh5ib9— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) July 16, 2016
We All Have the Duty to Tackle Fact Denial Behaviour in Science
In the Democratic World we All have this Responsibility to Tackle Establishment Fact Denial: https://t.co/MXoXcakQ8u pic.twitter.com/d12PRE9tnk— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) July 16, 2016
Friday, 15 July 2016
The Psychologist is In: "Next Darwinite please"
Many Darwinites should visit this psychologist for help & advice on rationality & reality https://t.co/TXI1CYH1CS pic.twitter.com/Rg31JGTRvq— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) July 15, 2016
Top Psychologist Dr Mark Griffiths of Nottingham Trent University in England has read the recent research publications, which reveal so much uncomfortable new evidence that punctures the old myth that no one known to Darwin or his influencers, or his influencercer's influencers, read Patrick Matthew's prior publication of the full hypothesis of macro evolution by natural selection before 1858.
Thursday, 14 July 2016
Sound Tautology: Knowledge contamination is proof of concept
Discovery of New Data Challenges Darwin's Story of Immaculate Conception https://t.co/Si2NOFWmBM #Science via @niume_official— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 14, 2016
@TakeThatDarwin Na that don't fit what they wrote... innit. Miracle man: https://t.co/cPweJHYQo7 bruv. pic.twitter.com/NwPxHhI4Ca— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) July 14, 2016
Darwin's Ghosts are Ghost Busted
Ghost Busted on Amazon https://t.co/awPnhTRUzr pic.twitter.com/UTbL4je0y9— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) July 14, 2016
Dr A. Wilson on "Matthew Denial"
Among many, here is just one possible reason for Matthew Denial Behaviour in the 19th centuryDr A. Wilson on the hot historical, social and natural science topic of "Matthew Denial": https://t.co/KXlWT18rDo pic.twitter.com/tIcsNcDdgi— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) July 14, 2016
Another possible reason for the "Matthew Denial" behaviour in the 19th century : https://t.co/q7tjnoGCLV pic.twitter.com/JtTsVHR500— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 14, 2016
Unlike in Britain, slavery in the USA appeared to be nowhere near abolition. The British Slavery Abolition Act outlawed slavery throughout most of the British Empire, except for territories controlled by the Hooker's paymaster, the rapacious East India Company, which continued with the abhorrent practice until as late as 1843.
Darwin's pals Joseph and William Hooker - and their pal John Lindley (who, it is newly discovered, cheated Matthew by fallaciously claiming another was first to import Giant redwoods into Britain), another employee of the East India Company - had many reasons to suppress the facts about Matthew's discovery. Their vested interests in slavery could well be one of them. The same goes for Darwin's pal David Anstead, who rubbished Matthew in 1860, because Anstead too was employed by the loathsome and murderous East India Company as lecturer at its Military Seminary at Addiscombe, as well as Kings College London.
Tuesday, 12 July 2016
Curse the Future
July 12, 2016
A Single Unified Voice? Just How Scientific is that Exactly?
What's very wrong with this picture @DrMarkGriffiths @royalsociety.— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 12, 2016
No wonder 'fact denial' https://t.co/nOpImotkf8 pic.twitter.com/DSUcmdUvJ5
Darwin Arrives in Hell
After 155 years delay, Darwin's train pulls into Bromley Station. He's arrived in Hell!: https://t.co/GIRRldc9vK pic.twitter.com/0SfKw4EEEy— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) July 12, 2016
Monday, 11 July 2016
Darwinists United v The Actual Facts
Darwinists United v Sutton Top Professor of Psychology offers diagnosis on who is irrational https://t.co/Drm19arP8C pic.twitter.com/jjIHrhYHMh— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) July 11, 2016
Excellent choice. Outstanding! https://t.co/HIjCEmaTME— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 19, 2016
Belief has no place in scientific scholarship outside debunking beliefs
Think & Act on the Principle of "Nullius in Verba"!
Social Science informs Darwinists on something potentially very scary among their membership https://t.co/IXeSwA6nIR pic.twitter.com/7DyspT3hOo— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 11, 2016
Saturday, 9 July 2016
GOTCHA! https://t.co/ICVRCeh01i— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 9, 2016
Friday, 8 July 2016
BELIEF IS THE ROOT OF DELUSION
"Extreme Skeptics" @TeessideSitP believe in absolutely NOTHING! Think & act on the principle of "Nullius in Verba"! pic.twitter.com/PpbaOFStpE— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 8, 2016
Thursday, 7 July 2016
The Google Metal Detector Analogy
Try this out. Then happy treasure hunting with Google pic.twitter.com/NJUA0ylSDl— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) July 7, 2016
Tuesday, 5 July 2016
Myths about Darwin (No 3.) The 'Unique and Idiosyncratic Darwin Myth'
In three blog posts on Darwin myths found so far in Howard's book, I have not yet progressed beyond page 1. The third myth on page 1 is the myth that Darwin was an original thinker and his work was highly idiosyncratic.
'Man's interference, by preventing this natural process of selection among plants, independent of the wider range of circumstances to which he introduces them, has increased the differences in varieties particularly in the more domesticated kinds...'
New Data Demands Paradigm Shift: https://t.co/LMpbVPMAh6 pic.twitter.com/P5IDcp4ry4— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) July 10, 2016
Darwin wrote (1844 - private essa) wrote:
Taking out the trees example, Darwin (1859), in opening words of Chapter One of 'The Origin of Species' Darwin again used Matthew's powerful artificial selection versus natural selection explanatory analogy of differences - without citing Matthew.'In the case of forest trees raised in nurseries, which vary more than the same trees do in their aboriginal forests, the cause would seem to lie in their not having to struggle against other trees and weeds, which in their natural state doubtless would limit the conditions of their existence…"
probability of the latter theory.'
The Man's Interference Analogy:
What did Matthew, Wallace and Darwin understand about artificial selection versus natural selection that makes the Artificial selection versus Natural Selection Analogy the perfect device to explain the natural process of selection?
Test the hypothesis
Other Darwinist Myths
1. Myths about Darwin (No 1.) The Darwin Archive Myth
2, Myths about Darwin (No 2.) The 'Galapagos Conception Myth' and 'Notebooks Myth'
IT CAME FROM A WORLD CONTAMINATED WITH CRONIES.— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) July 5, 2016
STOP the DARZILLA WITH NEWLY RESCUED FACTS https://t.co/SBIihYvf7E pic.twitter.com/ovPF72JyWy
Monday, 4 July 2016
Mynah Bird Darwinites
'@AtheistRepublic Agreed. But many atheists also are mynah birds: https://t.co/BZTDgjpPml pic.twitter.com/WK5zad24UL— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) July 5, 2016