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

Saturday 22 December 2018

Wikipedia Prats Fish Hooked by a Sprat

+ + + + +

Wednesday 19 December 2018

On Knowledge Contamination

Thinking about the preponderance of evidence for Patrick Matthew's (1831) influence upon Darwin's and Wallace's replication of his prior-published theory of evolution by natural selection (see my expert peer reviewed science article on that issue here). I wonder if the BBC Colditz series influenced Stephen Fry, via some kind of direct or indirect (saw it himself or else via friends, influencers, associates etc) knowledge contamination to come up with the name Captain Darling in the Blackadder comedy series? See usage of an officer apparently calling Captain Tim Downing "Darling" e.g. in Series 1, Episode 9 "Bribery and Corruption" in the BBC series - available in Boxset from Amazon.

Moreover, Rowan Atkinson had the idea of setting a new series of Blackadder in Colditz: (here 

Tuesday 18 December 2018

Merry Xmas Darwin Fans

Monday 17 December 2018

Darwinist Guilt Neutralization by Proxy?

Monday 10 December 2018

Do truth, lies and proven facts matter if they prove the scientific community to be made up of credulous fact denying pseudo scholarly idiots?

Sunday 9 December 2018

Why a forester first conceived Matthewism (it's not Darwinism because Darwin plagiarised the theory of macroevolution by natural selection)

Many years ago Zon explained exactly why a forester (Patrick Matthew) first conceived and prior published the complete theory of macroevolution by natural selection  before Darwin and Wallace replicated it years later.

Darwinism in Forestry. By Raphael Zon (1913) The American Naturalist Vol. 47, No. 561 (Sep.), pp. 540-546

Even without the new proof of Darwin’s and Wallace’s lies, deceptions and plagiarising science fraud that is afforded by big data analysis (Sutton 2014, 2017), the natural conclusion of Zon’s century old thesis is that neither Darwin nor Wallace had a comparably plausible framework of expertise that can be relied upon to understand how they were supposed to have arrived ‘independently’ of Matthew at exactly the same complex theory, terminology and explanatory examples. Click to read .

Interestingly, Alexander Kohn in 'False Prophets: Fraud and Error in Science and medicine' (1986, p.69) notes the following in relation to the massive Russian science fraudster, Lysenko (ironically Kohn unfortunately refers to Matthewism as Darwinism in typical establishment myth-led error):

'Among other of Lysenko's ideas for the improvement of Soviet agriculture one may mention the growing of sugar beat in summer in Central Asia (1943/44) and the cluster planting of trees. Each time the sugar beat shoots perished,  The idea of cluster planting was based on the rejection of the Darwinian concept of competition individuals of the same species (...) and its purpose was to create protecting belts of forest around fields. Not until 1954 did it become evident that this idea was also a failure, and the All Union Conference of Foresters voted it down as bankrupt, after a loss of several billion roubles.'

Of course, the concept of evolution by natural selection belongs to the forester Matthew, not Darwin. And it the idea of competition between trees that led to its conception - by a forester!

Those interested in such important facts may like to see my timeline presentation of the reactions of some fact denying historians of science and others to the seemingly unbearable truth of Darwin's science fraud by plagiarism and lies Here


Friday 7 December 2018

Merry Xmas Suckers!

Tuesday 4 December 2018

What's the Matter with Richard Dawkins?