In the current so-called "post truth age" where influential people are denying things that can be empirically proven to be true with empirical data (also known as lying) photographs of the truth are important.
Here then, for example, the art of photography Andy Sutton most ironically can also be used to inform science and history of the need to be informed by independently verifiable empirical data, not by artfully made up beloved science myths.
Our history of science has been wrongfully corrupted by a knowing lie told by Charles Darwin that no single person read Patrick Matthew's prior publication of the entire theory of evolution by natural selection. But today we now newly know, thanks to BigData analysis that in empirically proven reality, because its in published print in the historic publication record (also known as old books in print) that at least 30 people read and cited Matthew's (1831) book containing the theory before Darwin and Wallace in 1858/59 replicated it and claimed it as their own independently conceived bombshell theory. Thereafter, Darwin called it "my theory".
Do our history of science "experts" and our scientists need to be embarrassed by a photography art exhibition containing beautiful photographs of those books and periodicals , the very books and magazines etc, published before 1858 they are effectively hoping will remain buried in oblivion? Curtis Press Nonscience
