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

Friday 29 June 2018

BIG DATA IS VERY USEFUL

Tuesday 26 June 2018

Linnean Society Scandal: Alfred R. Wallace the Very Silly Paranormal Believer, Anti-Vaxxer, Great Ape Killer, Myth Maker, Plagiarist, Extortionist and Fraudster. History Repeating Itself in 2018



In 1858, Darwin and Wallace had their papers on evolution by natural selection read before the Linnean Society and then published in its journal (see Darwin, C. R. and Wallace, A. R. 1858. 'On the tendency of species to form varieties; and on the perpetuation of varieties and species by natural means of selection.' Journal of the Proceedings of the Linnaean Society of London). Neither Darwin nor Wallace cited Patrick Matthew's (1831) book 'On Naval Timber and Arboriculture' prior publication of the entire theory they each replicated (which, following Matthew's protestations in 1860, each later admitted he had discovered and published in full). In addition to replicated terminology and highly idiosyncratic explanatory analogies (see Sutton 2014, Sutton 2017), Big Data research (see Sutton 2015) reveals many newly discovered routes of possible Matthewian knowledge contamination of Darwin's and Wallace's supposedly independent conceptions of Matthew's prior-published origination. Ludicrously, Wallace - the species dealer and great ape killer  who, incidentally, stupidly believed adamantly in ghosts , the veracity of seances and even joined the pseudo-scientific anti-vax movement - claimed his Eureka moment came during a bout of malarial brain fever (which is just totally ridiculous) and, the Galapagos Islands Finches Beaks Myth being completely debunked by Sulloway (1982), we in fact know that Darwin claimed that his conception came about from nothing more than a slow synthesis from reading the prior-publications of others. And today we newly know, thanks to my discovery, that those others include Robert Chambers - a naturalist geologist and publisher who cited Matthew's 1831 book and then his later book 'Emmigration Fields' before writing his own guide on arboriculture and then a highly influential bestseller book on evolution 'The Vestiges of Creation'  (see Sutton 2015), a book which obsessed Darwin and, in his own words, most influenced Wallace.

Thanks to my research with the Big Data IDD method we now newly know that, as opposed to the old Darwinite tale - started as a plagiarising glory theft lie told by Darwin to deny what he had been told by Matthew - of none, that a total of seven naturalists read and cited Matthew's (1831) book pre-1858 (See Sutton 2015 for an expert peer reviewed science journal article to get the independently verifiable New Data).

Wallace's original letter (here) was doctored in his autobiography to remove the incriminating words ‘immediately’ and ‘assistance’. Get the story here.



The Linnean Society has a history of facilitating plagiarism debacles

In a recent Linnean Society paper Dagg, whose blogs and online comments reveal he is apparently rather obsessed with  several different areas of my work and read it all on this topic from 2014 onward - because he has commented on it ad nauseum - plagiarised my original (Sutton 2014a, 2014b) discovery that in 1842 Selby (Wallace's  1855 Sarawak paper editor) read and cited Matthew's (1831) prior published discovery of macroevolution by natural selection  He then bragged on Wikipedia (of all the seedy pseudo-scholarly places) to the malicious cyber stalker Derry that he failed to cite me.

Scholars interested in plagiarism and other academic misconduct can find the archived records of this shameful published behaviour and a great deal more on the relevant page on the Patrick Matthew website (here). Please be cautioned dear readers, because that page on PatrickMatthew.com contains an imbedded tweet and links to the Times Higher Education website archive of obscene abusive misogynist and anal insertion language published by Derry, who - incidentally - was dismissed from Edinburgh university for constantly weirdly harassing a young female teacher and many other people in Scotland, and officials of the National Lottery Heritage fund, for their association with my original new IDD Big Data discoveries about Patrick Matthew. As the PatrickMatthew.com page on Dawinite abuse and harassment reveals Derry has now escalated his weirdly obsessive cyberstalking harassment from harassing anyone who dares to write a positive review of my book to bombarding my friends, associates and leading criminologists and other academics with poison pen emails (some containing abuse language - many have been forwarded to me pending legal action) to now harassing one of my young female PhD students and also my co-author on the IDD method Professor Mark Griffiths. In his Linnean Society plagiarising paper Dagg thanks Derry for his help! In his Linnean Journal article, Dagg also thanks Mike Weale for his help. Weale, like Derry has attempted, also with absolute zero success, to harass me into silence on the significance of the New Data - and how other Darwinite academics have dealt with it badly by resigning from the editorial board of a science journal that published it - by emailing senior management at my university with ludicrous and childish malicious accusations. I will be addressing all these highly embarrassing disreputable issues before the press, academics and on camera in December 2018. See the embedded tweet below for details.
+
WALLACE WAS CLEARLY A CREDULOUS IDIOT (just like all the daft-as-a-brush scientists who unquestioningly swallowed his malarial fever cognitive enhancement rubbish), HE NOT ONLY BELIEVED IN GHOSTS AND SEANCES BUT WAS ALSO AN ARDENT PSEUDO SCHOLARLY ANTI-VAXXER

"Wallace's statistics seemed impressive but the committee members found numerous errors that seemed unworthy of someone of Wallace's reputation. Not only did Wallace and his fellow anti-vaccinationists ignore statistics that failed to support their view but many of the statistical tables were highly selective (doubly embarrassing since Wallace had accused the pro-vaccinationists of doing the same thing).Wallace was caught off-guard by the findings and was forced to admit that many of the statistics that he had presented were worthless." 

 "Even in the 20th century, anti-vaccination societies continued to proliferate and attracted numerous "star" supporters including Wallace and George Bernard Shaw (who wrote that vaccination was "a particularly filthy piece of witchcraft"), as well as health faddists, anti-vivisectionists, trade unionists, etc."

 (ref: Providentia)
+

+
+
+
+


+

Wednesday 20 June 2018

A. R. Wallace the ludicrous and delusional plagiarizing tableturner

Monday 18 June 2018

Facts are facts

+ +

Friday 15 June 2018

The story of a malicious academic vendetta is to be told

+

Wednesday 13 June 2018

Big Data, Evolution of Human Thought, Spread of Ideas and Evidence for Plagiarism

+
+ +

Saturday 9 June 2018

The Linnean Journal Scandal: A Tale of Stalking, Intimidation and Plagiarism

+
I HAVE A SIMILAR STORY OF NASTY, MALICIOUS VENDETTA HARASSING AND INTIMIDATION  OF UNIVERSITY MANAGEMENT AND TOP PROFESSORS  TO TELL AND I WILL BE TELLING IT ALL IN DECEMBER 2018  (SEE DETAILS)
+
+
+
+
+
+

Friday 8 June 2018

Google A.I is Reducing Google Functionality


Some peer reviewed papers on the scandal and what I uniquely found with the IDD method

1. http://britsoccrim.org/volume14/pbcc_2014_sutton.pdf

2. http://www.nauka-a-religia.uz.zgora.pl/index.php/pl/czasopismo/46-fag-2015/921-fag-2015-art-05

+

Wednesday 6 June 2018

The Matthew, Darwin and Wallace Linnean Society Scandal: A Most Unsettling Science Story

Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Kenneth Cukier (2013, p. 78), in their excellent book 'Big Data', explain what data is:

"To datafy a phenomenon is to put it in a quantified format so it can be tabulated and analysed."

That is exactly what I did in 2013 when I originally unearthed the fact, and published it in 2014 in my book 'Nullius in verba: Darwin's greatest secret' and a peer reviewed article, that besides Loudon (a naturalist) six other naturalists, out of a total of 25 people - many of whom were agriculturalists -  all of them (apart from Loudon) originally unearthed by me, cited Matthew's (1831) book before Darwin's and Wallace's Linnean Society journal replication of his theory without citation.

Prior to my research, the world's leading Darwin scholars, including Royal Society Darwin Medal winners de Beer and Mayer, wrote in esteemed scholarly published texts that they believed that no naturalist had read Matthew's original ideas before Darwin and Wallace replicated them in 1858. I bust that beloved science myth by identifying seven naturalists who did. Six of the seven are my original discoveries.

Therefore, when Dagg used my data on Selby in the Linnean Journal in 2018 without citing me as its discover it is my opinion that he plagiarised it. More so, by dong that he has given the impression in the Linnean Journal that he discovered it first. Moreover, Dagg knew that I did. But I published it first and Dagg well knows that fact because he has been obsessing about my work in this area and obsessing about my work on other unrelated topics in his online publications since 2014. On this serious issue, the tweets in this blog post direct you to an earlier longer post that provides all the details in this latest scene in the Matthew, Darwin and Wallace Linnean Society Scandal.


+
+
+
+

On camera, public meeting, press and senior academics present:



Monday 4 June 2018

Not an obscure writer on forest trees at all

In my research on Matthew I have proven many times that contrary to the Darwinite myth, he was not simply an unread obscure writer on forest trees.

Here, in this one further example, we see Matthew's (1831) book (which contains the original conception of macro evolution by natural selection) cited and praised in relation to information about spreading soot around plants to improve their growth. My book (Sutton 2014 & 2017) on the topic reveals that years before Darwin and Wallace replicated Matthew's original breakthrough ideas without citation that Matthew was read and cited many times, not only in the Encyclopedia Britannica, but at least 25 times, seven by naturalists, four of whom (Loudon, Chambers, Selby and Jameson) were at the epicentre of their influence.

The Gardener's Magazine and Register of Rural & Domestic Improvement, (1837) Volume 3. pp 517-518

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_TdNAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA518&dq=matthew+naval+timber+fertilizer+charcoal&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIjqfhmbvbAhWLKsAKHQqVAo0Q6AEILDAA#v=onepage&q=matthew%20naval%20timber%20fertilizer%20charcoal&f=false



The Daily Mail On Matthew 2018

Big Data IDD Method Metrics

Sunday 3 June 2018

GoogleBrag

Saturday 2 June 2018

Problematizing the licit market for stolen ideas


Available from Amazon and all good bookshops e.g:  Amazon.co.uk 

On December 6th 2018, will be giving a talk to Teesside Skeptics on the problem of the market for stolen ideas and how it motivates plagiarism. The presentation will focus upon the apparent general reluctance of the scientific "establishment" to admit proven mistakes in wrongful attribution of priority to its beloved science heroes.

 I will be unleashing a no holds barred humorous and entertaining merciless expose analysis of fully evidenced case study material of various desperate and malicious attempts made by members of the scientific community and others to silence me for having the temerity to use disruptive Big Data technology to originally unearth the fact that, as opposed to the old beloved science myth of none, the book containing Patrick Matthew's (1831) prior published origination of macroevolution by natural selection was cited by naturalists. Among them, four were at  the pre-1858 epicentre of influence upon Darwin and Wallace, before they replicated it, called it their own and Darwin deliberately lied by claiming alternately that no naturalist/no single person had ever read Matthew's bombshell breakthrough before he and Wallace supposedly independently conceived so much of it. Event details here


Further expert peer reviewed academic journal reading for anyone wishing to know what - that most amusingly has so upset some fact-denial abusive pseudo scholars - exactly, has been newly discovered, and how my despicable original unearthing discoveries were made:

1.  The hi-tech detection of Darwin’s and Wallace’s possible science fraud: Big data criminology re-writes the history of contested discovery. Here

2.  On Knowledge Contamination: New Data Challenges Claims of Darwin’s and Wallace’s Independent Conceptions of Matthew’s Prior-Published Hypothesis. Here

3. Using Date Specific Searches on Google Books to Disconfirm Prior Origination Knowledge Claims for Particular Terms, Words, and Names. Here






+

Friday 1 June 2018

You get new facts not just knowledge-gap filling wrong mere opinions when n=all