(Q) Who is the scientific crossing warden for Darwin, Wallace and their cronies?— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 17, 2019
(A) Patrick Matthew (The Scot robbed by the English Scientific establishment and its treacherous Edinburgh toadies) Bin the claptrap & get the independently verifiable facts: https://t.co/RKbJV7ogAU pic.twitter.com/TS0YatbjrR
Monday, 17 June 2019
Sunday, 16 June 2019
Saturday, 15 June 2019
Good to see the Scots are writing about how their great nation has been ripped off by the English stealing the most important theory ever originated. Come up to speed #Scotland & beware of nutjob lying crazy English Darwinite Cult trolls and cyber stalkers https://t.co/Q5l4B4vshD— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) June 15, 2019
Friday, 14 June 2019
That explains why scientists simply cannot cope with the New #BigData discovery that Darwin and Wallace were lying plagiarizers of a prior published theory that their major influencers/friends had prior read and cited: https://t.co/CLKiPRJoQT— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 14, 2019
Tuesday, 4 June 2019
Sunday, 2 June 2019
Don't be misled by the scientific establishment to accept tall tales, lies, idiocy and fake news regarding where the theory of evolution by natural selection really came from and who stole it from the Scots. pic.twitter.com/hazSANc93L— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 2, 2019
Friday, 3 May 2019
I actually am #delighted to learn today that a proud Scot (he donated 3 priceless letters - from Charles Darwin to Patrick Matthew - to the Scottish nation) donated a copy of my book on Darwin's plagiarizing science fraud to the National Library of Scotland. They accepted it. pic.twitter.com/A2wQXWVWtC— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) May 3, 2019
Thursday, 2 May 2019
Pleased to announce a call for chapters for an international edited collected on #technologyfacilitatedviolence with @eQuality_ca’s Jane Bailey, myself & @n_henry -practitioners, academics, PhD/ECRs working in this area (all disciplines) pls get in touch @MonashCrim @Monash_Arts pic.twitter.com/hyI6JtGEpK— Assoc/Prof Asher Flynn (@AsherFlynn) May 1, 2019
Wednesday, 1 May 2019
I have no problem with the term "natural process of selection" coined by Patrick Matthew (1831) and plagiarised into "process of natural selection" by science fraudster Charles Darwin (who stole Matthew's theory). But @BiologiaPensamt this is one for you: https://t.co/0EHAyDtOVZ— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) May 1, 2019
Dover's argument same as yours (I disagree) that "selection" is a confusing term. Page 9 writes: "There is no Great Selector in the sky". But Matthew NEVER once implied there was. Made it clear there was NOT. But Darwin kept the notion of what he called a "Creator" in his work.— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) May 1, 2019
Yes as discussed so many times. The analogous selection hypothesis is analogous to artificial selection in tree nurseries, which is Matthew's 1831 highly idiosyncratic arboriculturalist analogy, slyly plagiarised by Darwin in his private essay = Explanatory analogy for the theory pic.twitter.com/f6Rs5FLKgY— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) May 1, 2019
I agree on Matthew's merit, novelty and solid work, of which natural selection is a useless metaphor.— Emilio Cervantes (@BiologiaPensamt) May 1, 2019
Monday, 22 April 2019
Were the seeds the result of artificial selection to produce curved wood for house or shipbuilding? Or were the saplings pruned and trained for the same reason? @Hollyonline - Image from 1831 book Darwin & Wallace plagiarised and then serial lied about: https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/cGT2h8GQMI— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) April 22, 2019
There are nearly identically bent trees about half a mile south west of Symonds Yat Rock! (picture doesn't show them very well) pic.twitter.com/vp9PsKMwUP— Marcin Zielinski (@rat_biker_83) April 22, 2019
Thursday, 18 April 2019
Not exactly Matthew's drawing in this case was to explain how to train a tree to make bent planks for naval ship building. Of course he saw naval power and sea travel as key to which nation would be fittest to survive. Darwin's was of Matthew's ramification (branching) of species— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) April 18, 2019
Wednesday, 17 April 2019
Google Trashed Darwin's Reputation with New facts About What he Really Was and how Credulous Many Scientists Really Are
Just one example of how new independently verifiable bombshell facts that disrupt so called scientific "establishment" credulous beliefs influence the mere opinions of the general public to be incurious when the "establishment" refuses to face new facts https://t.co/K2QXOa8nvK pic.twitter.com/qqrrZtrtiK— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) April 17, 2019
Monday, 1 April 2019
The original meaning of 'April Fools' #AprilFools is a little different than how we see it today. Note also, it does not mention there being a day. Could it have gone on for a month, traditionally?— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) April 1, 2019
Found with the #IDD research Method [@DrMarkGriffiths]https://t.co/toQBT39ExD pic.twitter.com/SgwclbMch9
We can, traditionally, keep this up the month. But IDD research breakthrough [https://t.co/Nli3gCzRvO] revealing that once hidden fact would not be eligible for #Managerial💩idiot-REF entry https://t.co/toQBT39ExD— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) April 1, 2019
Interestingly, the book belonged to biologist Stephen Jay Gould pic.twitter.com/XPLmbrPSRN
Sunday, 31 March 2019
Artificially select them not to lie or commit fraud. Especially #ScienceFraud English #Toff #Darwin plagiarised original prior published conception of evolution by natural selection from Scottish naturalist Patrick Matthew— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 31, 2019
(2) https://t.co/CLKiPRJoQT pic.twitter.com/G1z8fyW3J3
Review of book "Nullius in Verba" written by a Scot who co-owned 3 priceless letters from English #toff Charles Darwin (plagiarist) to Patrick Matthew, Scottish regional Chartist leader, naturalist and originator of the theory Darwin stole, @80_mcswan 🏴https://t.co/9R6EROkiGH d— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 31, 2019
Or one most circumstance suited to the ecological niche it finds itself in - for various reasons. Problem for Darwin is #BigData created a new niche in research that exposed his lies & science fraud by plagiarism. His long hidden fraud can't survive now https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/hEQQMRNtEA— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 31, 2019
Saturday, 30 March 2019
On #Brexit Shambles and evil consequence. A Darwin? You mean a plagiarizing, serial lying, glory thieving anti-chartist #Toff #Landed #fraudster? Proud of that? Proud to have the World's Greatest Science Fraudster by plagiarism and glory theft? https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/lMB4Zsg5ux— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 30, 2019
Monday, 25 March 2019
Artificial selection behaviour of Tory Toffs who have orchestrated #Brexit goes against C19th pre-EU recommendations of Chartist real originator of the theory of evolution by natural selection, who the landed Toff Darwin plagiarised then lied about: p369: https://t.co/G5HTAGbUUc pic.twitter.com/2uG0RqLPxi— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 25, 2019
Wednesday, 20 March 2019
Doesn't help when scientific "establishment" of the public schooled, other wealthy individuals & their toadies has for 160 years been blatantly covering up Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarism of the libertarian seditious Chartist, Patrick Matthew's theory. https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/NYo9gw3Wp1— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 20, 2019
Tuesday, 19 March 2019
Public schools are part of an artificial selection in-breeding program that Matthew originator of the theory of natural selection identified as ruining the UK back in 1831. This enabled Darwin to steal his theory with the help of public schoolboys known as "the Establishment" pic.twitter.com/PHfxCZzr9X— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 18, 2019
More from Matthew (1831) here. But his book is run through with anti-upper class politics, linked to his theory of what he coined 'The Natural Process of Selection." So named because it is natural, a process and involves selection in nature compared to artificial selection by human culture. That is surely why Darwin saw it as essential to steal the very same four words and to try to conceal his fraud by originally shuffling them to "process of natural selection." And that is why Darwin also saw it as necessary to steal Matthew's original analogy between artificial selection and natural selection in trees grow in nurseries versus those grown in nature.
Don't take my word for it. Get the independently verifiable facts, not the public schoolboy establishment nonsense. Get those peer reviewed verifiable facts HERE in a scientific journal as a good place to start.
Monday, 18 March 2019
Dutch PM compares May's deal to a limbless fighting knight— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 18, 2019
1. https://t.co/8wbbsK8BZs …
Is he one of my Dutch fan club? Coincidence or #KnowledgeContamination influence? Because I used same analogy much earlier on Twitter
But what if the Dutch PM was to repeat many, many more of the original ideas in my tweets? What if his known influencers and their influencers were to cite my tweets? What if he was to take my original and prior published Market Reduction Approach and call it his own? What if he three-word shuffled my original name for it to 'Reduction, Market Approach"? Any reasonable person would then assume I have in some way (directly or indirectly) knowledge contaminating his brain with my own. Moreso, I'm told I have a Dutch fan club - via this comment reply to the latest review of my book Nullius.
"In my opinion, your review of Sutton's book is balanced and correct.
In our Dutch Sutton-fanclub we sometimes do not call him Mike Sutton but Mike Tyson, because he single handedly out-argued an army of neo-darwinists."
.What do I, the Dutch Prime Minister @markrutte. and Charles Darwin have in common (or not as the case may be)? https://t.co/7fiuVrZF8y pic.twitter.com/TeePfoYrR0— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) March 18, 2019
#Fun #Humour #History & #Science. What do I, The Dutch Prime Minister and Charles ("#TheCopycatKing") Darwin all have in common? Or not, as the case may be. You decide on the basis of the independently verifiable facts weighed with reasonable probability: https://t.co/jWX1huuYey pic.twitter.com/bfF65tecdg— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 18, 2019
Sunday, 17 March 2019
The untold tale of the woman who dug up ancient sea monsters https://t.co/ZItMqxzDmD— Rachel Harding (@Silverwriter) March 17, 2019
Portrayed for her orignal discoveries as an idiot savant - the scientific establishment did the same thing to Patrick Matthew. Why? Because they are slyly - through propaganda - bigging up one of their own, who they want to look cleverer than the actual discoverer/ originator. pic.twitter.com/zoY3GMrubr— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 17, 2019
Saturday, 16 March 2019
Don't be a Darwin: Don't steal the work and ideas of others, claim it as your own and then lie when challenged on it!
Sutton 2014 and 2018). But if you do what he did you will be caught and humiliated.
Professor: "Why is is wrong to depict Darwin a monkey or ape?— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) March 16, 2019
Student: "Because apes & humans both descended from a now extinct common ancestor?"
Professor: "No! It's simply because they should draw him as a cat. He is the world's greatest #copycat. He plagiarised the theory." pic.twitter.com/vYRZFySn2Y
Friday, 15 March 2019
Top chronic fatigue researcher QUITS due to 'hostile' trolls https://t.co/Gm2jDamVn5 . This happens after groundbreaking research. I've had Darwin superfans writing poison pen emails, cyberstalking my university employer, students and associates etc See: https://t.co/Ko6Z7GCth2 pic.twitter.com/RXhATqBU1o— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 15, 2019
Thursday, 14 March 2019
Hilarious & #ironic @LinneanSociety society hosts event: "Imposter Syndrome: How successful people often feel like frauds." They should really host one on frauds they facilitated to make originators feel like imposters of their own original breakthroughs! https://t.co/vHTppqTJMW pic.twitter.com/d1KCuhWqnk— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) March 14, 2019
Wednesday, 13 March 2019
Tuesday, 12 March 2019
Since The Linnean Society Journal @BiolJLinnSoc allowed a jealous twerp to plagiarise me, I'm going to make sure it gets all the publicity it deserves. The Linnean Society has a long history of facilitating plagiarism #DarwinCat On Darwin's Cat #copycat: https://t.co/tvgtt3FThh pic.twitter.com/vKwbVDglDq— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 12, 2019
Monday, 11 March 2019
Cat is out of the bag. No amount of corrupt activities from likes of the @BiolJLinnSoc Linnean Society, which is facilitating plagiarism of my original work in this area by cultish Darwin fans, in order to try to cover it up, can put it back inside. Proof https://t.co/C8o3fPbLP4 pic.twitter.com/NvBgatpvh0— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 11, 2019
Sunday, 10 March 2019
For 160 years pseudo scholars and ignorant creationist have lampooned Charles Darwin as a monkey or ape. They got that wrong. They should have been lampooning him as a copycat.
Darwin is the world's greatest plagiarising science fraudster by glory theft of a prior published theory. A theory that his friends, influencers and influencer's influencers read and are newly discovered to have cited in the literature before he or Wallace wrote a word on the topic anywhere (see Nullius).
.For 160 years Darwin has been lampooned by creationists as an ape or monkey. What scholars should have been doing is lampooning him as a cat, a #CopyCat.— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 10, 2019
Darwin is the World's greatest plagiarist & serial liar about Patrick Matthew, whose theory he stole https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/bCd1JqRmJa
Saturday, 9 March 2019
Friday, 8 March 2019
States of Denial @a8drewson Delusional fans dementedly defended what facts reveal to be indefensible— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 8, 2019
1. Michael Jackson was a serial child abuser https://t.co/OV4gAaETyF
2. Charles Darwin was a serial liar & plagiarizer of the theory that made him famous: https://t.co/nGMgtkFidy pic.twitter.com/M1V5eYBO6r
Wednesday, 6 March 2019
This Amazon reviewer of my book donated priceless letters from Charles Darwin to Patrick Matthew to the @natlibscot National Library of #Scotland. Organisers of the @Cambridge_Uni Darwin Collection then went hopping mad they could not own them for England instead. This is what we are dealing with.Latest top reviewer of my book on Darwin's plagiarism & lies draws attention to obnoxious Darwin worshippers' response. He asks is there a stinking rat at the centre of all this because they are unable defend the indefensible? Suggests you read my book:https://t.co/9R6EROkiGH … pic.twitter.com/PNIsHXIyUm— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 6, 2019
Monday, 25 February 2019
Why do we still talk about transparently absurd pseudoscience? My conclusion: we need to be more curious about how the world really works. https://t.co/eKMrB9iihH— Tim Harford (@TimHarford) February 25, 2019
Absolutely. Newly unearthed facts proving Charles Darwin & Alfred Wallace both plagiarised the theory of evolution by natural selection have deeply upset the scientific establishment, leading them to shameful silly attacks on me. Here is just one example: https://t.co/y6D1rl1NIy— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) February 25, 2019
Friday, 22 February 2019
Giant bee found in 19th Century by Earth's (joint) greatests science fraudster by plagiarism and glory theft - Alfred Russel Wallace - feared extinct, just been found again:— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) February 21, 2019
(1) On the bee: https://t.co/F9ma7mZ5QR
(2) On Wallace's plagiarising fraud: https://t.co/aInM0fTdvH pic.twitter.com/8jhctMg1Qh
Wallace never discovered that bee at all. A local took it to show him! Here
Wallace never "discovered it". A local took it to him. Maybe that local showed him Matthew's book containing the theory of evolution he never discovered either, because it was prior published in that book & cited by Selby his Sarawak paper editor & friends of his mentor W. Hooker pic.twitter.com/iiOp69O7Ow— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) February 23, 2019
Friday, 15 February 2019
YES! How about case where editor resigned from editorial board of science journal that dared publish newly unearthed independently verifiable facts about Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarism & lies regarding Matthew's prior published breakthrough. https://t.co/y6D1rl1NIy— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) February 15, 2019
Wednesday, 13 February 2019
Neither knows facts on who originated theory. How Darwin & Wallace plagiarised & then lied about originator— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) February 13, 2019
1 https://t.co/3XMQL72PHL …
2 https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL …
3. https://t.co/Nli3gCzRvO …
4. https://t.co/uDWRdLPKJd …
5. https://t.co/CLKiPRJoQT … pic.twitter.com/Vc9Tciw41O pic.twitter.com/jEa0hkBdhM
Credulous Darwin Worshipper Cult— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) February 13, 2019
If you thought it was an exaggeration that there is a credulous, ignorant of the facts, Charles Darwin beatifically delusional worship cult, here is some hard confirmatory evidence for its existence. Look at their faces.https://t.co/ZFhF6COVXa
Tuesday, 12 February 2019
Happy Darwin World's greatest Science Fraudster by Plagiarism and lying glory theft day:— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) February 12, 2019
5. https://t.co/R3oTyYSJQE pic.twitter.com/nYBAyUlAOY
Monday, 11 February 2019
-Darwin needs removing. He plagiarized theory of evolution by natural selection & later lied about who he knew who had prior read it & even called it "the origin of species" in 1832, years before Darwin's & Wallace's 1858 @BiolJLinnSoc Linnean Society fraud https://t.co/CLKiPRJoQT pic.twitter.com/MPrrSKqx7f— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) February 11, 2019
Darwin now needs putting on a list of great plagiarising science fraudsters http://patrickmatthew.com/onewebmedia/Sutton2%20Cited%20Fraud%20and%20Scientific%20Misconduct.pdf
#BigData research uncovered fact Darwin now needs removing from such lists and adding to lists of the greatest plagiarizing science fraudsters ever— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) February 11, 2019
2. On the Big Data IDD method that uncovered Darwin's & Wallace's sly fraud: https://t.co/Nli3gCzRvO pic.twitter.com/WA038FIjTX
Sunday, 10 February 2019
Thursday, 7 February 2019
Amazing just how much of a role the esteemed Linnean Society @BiolJLinnSoc @BotJLinnSoc @LinneanSociety @ZoolJLinnSoc has played in supporting the credulous worship of plagiarists and proven woo-woo idiots. And it continues to do so today. Get the facts: https://t.co/MDFL9kDbMG pic.twitter.com/9qDbrNBJ7n— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) February 7, 2019
Wednesday, 6 February 2019
Mind you, Darwin and Wallace worshippers are as bad. They credulously believe in Darwin's and Wallace's claims to have miraculously conceived Patrick Matthew's prior published theory (Darwin from the literature and Wallace from the first and only claimed case of malarial fever cognitive enhancement) after their friends and influencers and influencer's influencers cited Matthew's book and the bombshell theory in it: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nullius-Verba-Darwins-greatest-secret/dp/1541343964Darwin fell for that quackery - hook line and sinker. Mind you his co-plagiarising science fraudster Alfred Wallace believed in spirits and mediums and was an ardent moronic anti-vaxxer.— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) February 6, 2019
3. On fraud: https://t.co/zflwNCG4Zd pic.twitter.com/IPgwXM4nwT
Sunday, 3 February 2019
After Darwin and Wallace plagiarised his work, Matthew was also listed as a noted botanist in the 1881 Jackson's Guide to the Literature of Botany (here) and again (noting that "Jacks" reference) as a noted botanist here on page 116 of than 1898 Biographical Index of British and Irish Botanists, in which the authors of that guide write in its preface that they excluded inclusion of obscure or trivial writers on the topic).
Thursday, 31 January 2019
Re question. Britain was overpopulated. Patrick Matthew (Chartist leader & landowner) saw emigration as solution to the artificial selection by career & marriage blocking of best of the lower classes by the upper. He was against such dysfunctional artificial selection of humans. pic.twitter.com/JlyCjey0bF— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 31, 2019
Friday, 25 January 2019
Matthew had an international reputation as an agriculturalist and writer on that topic in Europe and the USA (see Woodbury cited at end of his post) long before Darwin. Yet the serial liar Darwin sought to portray Matthew (even after Matthew had informed him that the opposite was true) that he was a mere obscure Scottish writer on forest trees. Credulous neo-religious Darwin and Wallace cultish worshippers have fallen for Darwin's sly propaganda plagiarising cover-up lies ever since.
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
Emilio @BiologiaPensamt Hugh @HughDower For #veracity: Further intelligence on Patrick Matthew's pre-1858 international reputation. Supplied from the Netherlands last night.— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 25, 2019
Don't tell #RichardDawkins or credulous Darwin #cultists. They might explode🤪 https://t.co/M9nkoT2Wm3
Whatever the case on the theory, it's not Darwin's theory (despite what credulous neo-religious Darwin worshipping cultists would have us swallow). All the evidence proves he stole it from its originator Patrick Matthew 1. https://t.co/LMpbVPuYSw— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 24, 2019
2. https://t.co/yZSRhv40YX & Lied https://t.co/i5ObQPqFiH
Darwin became convinced by Lamarckism in later life, believing Blacksmiths passed on the muscles gained through their occupation to their offspring. Wallace believed in the woo-woo spirits of parlour room mediums and was an avid anti-vaxxer. The ha ha ha heroes of Darwin worship!— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 24, 2019
Just as Darwin & his latterday credulous worshippers sought to censure truth about Matthew - the extent of his theory & who prior read it who influenced Darwin & Wallace - before Darwin & Wallace replicated it, & then claimed no one had read it as a lying excuse for plagiarism.— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 25, 2019
Thursday, 24 January 2019
NOTE Lindley was a friend and co-author with Loudon, and ....wait for it...a great friend of William Hooker - him again - (acquaintance of the proven serial liar and plagiarist Charles Darwin, and Father of Darwin's best friend Joseph Hooker).
Full facts in Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret
Wednesday, 23 January 2019
The many newly discovered routes for pre-1858 Matthewian knowledge contamination of the replicating brains of Darwin and Wallace just just keep on heading toward the Hooker's of Kew (father William Hooker and his son Joseph - both leading economic botanists) - particularly William Hooker who was also Wallace's sponsor, mentor, specimen customer and correspondent. The question is - how many such possible multiple coincidences do we need to to sum to the probability that they are not coincidental at all?
How many otherwise multiple "route for knowledge contamination" coincidences sum to the probability they are not coincidental at all? Here Matthew and William Hooker cited in same essay on economic botany https://t.co/DrNwB6VaEF Clearly, Matthew was not an obscure author at all. pic.twitter.com/k3x3iYg6Yn— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 23, 2019
1. The anonymous essayist (1843) "S G 2" pp 226-227. "Economical uses of the Larch" in Knight's Penny Magazine, Volume 3, [edited by Charles Knight.] https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=W-E2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA227&dq=%22Mathew%22+%22naval+timber%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwizr_2xvIPgAhURtnEKHRn9BQwQ6AEIXjAJ#v=onepage&q=%22Mathew%22%20%22naval%20timber%22&f=false
2. Patrick Matthew citing his (1831) book in 'Testimonials in favour of W.L. Lindsay ... as a candidate for the office of Conservator of the museum of the Royal College of Surgeons, Edinburgh (1852). - Note in this same publication we find a testimonial by Robert Jameson (Darwin's Geology professor no less!Moreover the testimonials are for a naturalist whose work Darwin later relied upon!) (Click here for the details)
Friday, 18 January 2019
Natural selection aids species in fraud. Darwin was a plagiarising science fraudster by glory theft of that theory. His abilities in deception aided him enormously. Only now, is new technology unweaving his tangled web of lies & science fraud by plagiarismhttps://t.co/yMLRSHW8Vc pic.twitter.com/DKQ2uZoi7k— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 18, 2019
Thursday, 17 January 2019
Hugh Dower's page on PatrickMatthew.com is here: https://patrickmatthew.com/hugh%20dower.html
Please everyone, don't tell #DarwinWorshippers about @HughDower 's new page on https://t.co/zflwNCotAD as they are likely to experience further episodes of #dysological nervous shock induced by veracity. We don't want to be held responsible for that, do we?https://t.co/TgrLy15PBt pic.twitter.com/MlSC1AlKYl— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 17, 2019
Tuesday, 15 January 2019
Conclusion on the topic of 'knowledge contamination' from the latest IDD method bombshell breakthrough in the history of scientific discovery and Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarism of Matthew's prior-published and often-prior cited theory (see related earlier blog post here).
Above all else, the unearthing of the fact that both heretical evolutionist Professor Robert Jameson and his nephew, the botanist William Jameson knew of Matthew and were aware of his work On Naval Timber is confirmation for the concept of knowledge contamination and its applicability in the story of Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarizing replication of Matthew's theory of evolution by natural selection from that book. This is because pre-1858 Matthew twice appeared in print citing himself as the author of On Naval Timber in works edited by and also contributed to by Robert Jameson (who was, incidentally, Darwin's tutor at Edinburgh University), whose nephew William Jameson was a regular correspondent of William Hooker. William Hooker was in turn an associate of Charles Darwin and father of Darwin's best friend, evolutionary confidant and botanical motor Joseph Hooker. If knowledge contamination is not relevant then anyone claiming so perhaps believes no amount of what might be seen as improbable and closely linked multiple coincidences ever sum to a likelihood that they are not actually coincidental at all? By way of example: Are we to believe that the fact Robert Jameson edited the journal containing an article by Matthew, in which Matthew cited his own 1831 book and where an advert for that book made the subject matter of species and varieties in it plain and clear, and that Matthew appeared in an academic testimonial with Robert Jameson, where Matthew again cited his book has nothing at all to do with the fact William Jameson then cited Matthew's book and mentioned one of Matthew's important observations that supported Matthew's original theory of evolution by natural selection?
My assumption is that 19th century scientists would as likely as not discuss then if they were aware of the heretical ideas in Matthew's book. And aware of them they were made, not only by the famous naturalist and editor Loudon who wrote in 1831 a very public review that Matthew's (1831) book contained important new information on what he termed the "origin of species", but amongst others by an anonymous reviewer who wrote that he/she disdained so much as rumination on Matthew's writings on law of nature, a fact that Darwin deification fanatical official Wikipedia editors fought desperately to permanently delete by deleting it again and again when its fully referenced source in the historic publication record was put on the Patrick Matthew page on Wikipedia. This desperate Darwinist superfan fact denial behaviour, on the world's worst encyclopedia, with all fully verifiable facts on that disgraceful matter can be seen here. What were those Wikipedia editors so afraid of? And what do they remain afraid of today? I think the answer is they were and remain afraid of 'knowledge contamination' of the wider scientific community and the wider general public with newly unearthed data that disconfirms all Darwin fans mere mythology about Darwin's originality, honesty and disproves the lies Darwin wrote about Matthew and the myth fuelled bias-blinkered and fake-facts claptrap his fanatical followers have written about Matthew since.
Secord's book on the Vestiges (its anonymous author Robert Chambers also newly discovered by me to have cited Matthew's 1831 book) in : 'Victorian Sensation' absolutely demonstrates that the heretically delicious topic of organic evolution was on everyone's lips. Moreover, two acts of Parliament were passed to stop such issues being discussed in public scientific societies. Knowledge contamination is such an important issue. If not, why were all those science clubs and societies formed - if not to bring naturalists together to discuss new ideas? That was one very important reason given for the founding of the British Association for Advancement of Science - for the very reason that others were hypothesising about evolution. So weighing all these facts, a quite reasonable assumption is, I think, that 19th century naturalists might well have discussed the topic of Matthew's book with fellow naturalists, if they were aware of it. Then there are all those letters from these so called "men of letters" - letters kept and even more burned that where is could have been discussed in correspondence. The time is now to look in the archives of those naturalists we newly know did read and cite Matthew's (1831) book (see Sutton 2015) to see what can be found in that regard pre-Darwin's and Wallace's 1858 claimed independent replications of Matthew's prior published - and prior cited by their friends, editors and influencers and their influencer's influencers - complete theory of macroevolution by natural selection, including his name for it and his highly idiosyncratic explanatory example and analogy of differences between artificial and natural selection.
Reasoned arguments (see text in image file) @HughDower on why the latest discovery about Robert Jameson confirms the suitability of the notion of "Knowledge Contamination" in the story of Charles Darwin's science fraud by lies and plagiary. The story: https://t.co/2Jxxr6GMrm pic.twitter.com/7izaxADqqw— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 15, 2019
Original expert peer reviewed article: On Knowledge Contamination: New Data Challenges Claims of Darwin’s and Wallace’s Independent Conceptions of Matthew’s Prior-Published Hypothesis
My book containing more information: Nullius in Verba: Darwin's Greatest Secret (paperback version)
Hugh Dower's @HughDower original research reveals more examples of independently verifiable proof that contrary to the Oh So Unusually Honest Darwin Myth Charles Darwin was clearly a blatant serial liar when it came to his pre 1858 influencers. Facts here https://t.co/DWt7Oo9OXU pic.twitter.com/E5uS0sv7VI— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) January 17, 2019