"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.
+@UnsetSciStories Here is an unsettling science story— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 6, 2018
Academic uses my originally unearthed finding. Fails to cite me for it in Linnean Journal @BiolJLinnSoc Then brags on #Wikipedia about it to a malicious cyber stalker intimidator of my PhD student! https://t.co/tvgtt3FThh pic.twitter.com/7PIoU6z4iS
+This is what they tried to do to me & still try to do. @lizmorrish How a victim tells their story with all its implications in a way that does not allow them to be falsely portrayed as a nutter with a persecution complex is a challenge to be PR managed. https://t.co/E8sdLN6Sbt— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 7, 2018
+Yes I am Liz. And that narrative is to be fully supported by independently verifiable paper letter, newsprint, email and archived website and blog site evidence. I will share it with you for your important groundbreaking academic research into this area.— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 7, 2018
+The issues at stake - notably academic freedom - is something Laurie Taylor is interested in @JayneEEgerton The story has many dimension but the institutional backdrop should interest all academics that care about academic integrity as much as @Criminotweet does— Andy Wilson (@a8drewson) June 7, 2018
On camera, public meeting, press and senior academics present:
I have & will present data @TeessideSitP re malicious fact denial toadying shock troops for preservation of sacred science myths preying on "risk society" corporate university problem to harass into silence researchers who uncover disturbing new evidence: https://t.co/4xWGfK4cG0— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 7, 2018