Everyone knows Charles Darwin’s idea of ‘survival of the fittest', but Brian J Ford says the theory was never Darwin’s.— Curtis Press (@CurtisPress_) September 28, 2020
Read more in Nonscience Returns. Preorder now: https://t.co/aj6UPOoVTD #nonscience #brianjford #sciencepublisher #nonfiction #mustread pic.twitter.com/ES4k3mTpMb
More amazing fact denial desperate codswallop published in 2020 in the same journal, by descent, that, back in 1858, published Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarism of Matthew's original theory. This is a ludicrous attempt to divert attention from the verfiable facts of the newly discovered data (e.g. Sutton 2015) that proves Darwin and Wallace plagiarised Matthew's (1831) prior published theory. Darwin worshipping malicious idiots Derry and Dagg are arguing - in a ludicrous attempt to divert attention from Darwin's newly proven plagiarism of Matthew - Matthew's theory was not essentially the same as Darwin's even though both Darwin (1860) and Wallace (1879) said it was. As though Dagg the plagiarist of my research and Derry the obscene harasser and cyberstalker (facts of their disgraceful behaviour are here) know more than Darwin and Wallace did about their own (replicating) work. The Biological Journal of the Linnean Society is now total joke. Birds of a feather certainty flock together. The facts of Dagg's plagiarism of my research in that journal are here.
Darwin in his (1860) reply to Matthew in the Gardener's Chronicle fully admitted he had replicated Matthew's prior published theory: "" I have been much interested by Mr. Patrick Matthew’s communication in the Number of your Paper, dated April 7th. I freely acknowledge that Mr. Matthew has anticipated by many years the explanation which I have offered of the origin of species, under the name of natural selection." Darwin (1861) did the same from the third edition onwards of his book the Origin of Species: Darwin replicated and admitted it when he wrote: "In 1831 Mr Patrick Matthew published his work on Naval Timber and Arboriculture in which he gives precisely the same view on the origin of species as that presently to be alluded to propounded by Mr Wallace and myself in the Linnean Journal and as that enlarged on in the present volume." Moreover, as if that is not enough to show what utter tripe the Dagg and Derry Show is Darwin himself, being one of the world's three foremost experts of all time on natural selection (those three being Matthew. Darwin and Wallace), acknowledged this in a letter to Patrick Matthew dated 13th June 1862: “I presume I have the pleasure of addressing the author of the work on Naval Architecture and the first enunciator of the theory of Natural Selection.”
For his part, Wallace in (1879a) fully admitted that he knew Matthew got there first with the entire thing he and "To my mind your quotations from Mr. Patrick Matthew are the most remarkable things in your whole book, because he appears to have completely anticipated the main ideas both of the "Origin of Species" & of "Life & Habitat".Aso in 1879b Wallace wrote: "Mr. Matthew apprehended the theory of natural selection, as well as the existence of more obscure laws of evolution, many years in advance of Mr. Darwin and myself, and in giving almost the whole of what Mr. Matthew has written on the subject Mr. Butler will have helped to call attention to one of the most original thinkers of the first half of the 19th century."
In their desperate fact denial smog-article Dagg and Derry - arguably - misrepresent what I wrote on page 6 of my book. They write:
"Sutton (2017: 6) asserted that Matthew’s theory only differed from Darwin’s and Wallace’s in the occurrence of global catastrophes"
What I actually write on page 6 of my 2017 book is (bold and underlined emphasis added here):
"Matthew, quite correctly allowed for geological and meteorological catastrophes in his model, but Darwin and Wallace never. Matthew's original theory of macroevolution by natural selection is, in every other relevant way, apart from that great superiority, virtually the same as Darwin's and Wallace's later versions."
And relevant here - in the context of my entire book and even the rest of the content of that page - is its relevance to the evidence that Darwin and Wallace plagiarised Matthew's 1831 original theory, his original terminology and his original and highly idiosyncratic explanatory analogies.
Leading Biologist Brian J Ford @brianjford read and then reviews my book "Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret" https://t.co/CLKiPRJoQT— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) October 4, 2020
Proper academics like Brian J. Ford know what plagiarism is. Fact denial Darwin fanatics don't want you to know the bombshell 💣facts. pic.twitter.com/r9frnv8O0U
The image of page 6 of my book below sets the record straight on what Dagg and Derry are up to in misrepresenting my research in their desperate 2020 article
Typical of Derry, he posts his savaging reviews of "The Golden Rule" - his supposed address - all over the Internet e.g. also on Trip Adviser (archived here for evidence).
The disgraced plagiarism facilitating @BiolJLinnSoc published by @OxUniPress is at it again. This time allowing a malicious, serially dishnobscene cyberstalker & his plagiarist associate to misrepresent my research in order to keep the Patrick Matthew Supermyth going: https://t.co/8xWt2ilXnV— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) October 4, 2020
Hilarious. Derry the cyberstalker obscene harasser & Dagg the plagiarist of my research published a pile of Darwin worshipping rubbish in disgraced @BiolJLinnSoc society— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) October 3, 2020
1. Latest guano https://t.co/91JvD7fTal
2. On Derry and Dagg the plagiarist: https://t.co/yVTTd4kqsy
Indeed, we know plagiarism from (ahem) personal experience. Plagiarists unwittingly admit two key facts: first, they can't think of anything to do by themselves, and secondly, they know your ideas are far better than theirs. Backhanded it may be, but it's a compliment!— brianjford (@brianjford) October 4, 2020
I agree. The fact that Weale, Dagg and Derry have had three articles about Patrick Matthew, and turned his Wikipedia page into a tome, suggests they are rattled.— Hugh Dower (@HughDower) October 4, 2020