Patrick Matthew: Diligent research proves the "majority view" 100 per cent wrong!

Old, credulous, Darwin scholar, endlessly parroted, "majority view", based on Darwin's 100 per cent proven lies:

Sir Gavin de Beer (FRS), Royal Society Darwin Medal winner, wrote in the Wilkins Lecture for the Royal Society (de Beer 1962 on page 333):

 "...William Charles Wells and Patrick Matthew were predecessors who had actually published the principle of natural selection in obscure places where their works remained completely unnoticed until Darwin and Wallace reawakened interest in the subject.'

100 per cent proven and independently verifiable dis-confirming facts:

Please note. You can read more on the concept of knowledge contamination and further details regarding the "real facts" of the history of discovery of natural selection: here. 

The independently verifiable newly discovered facts that prove the above information 100 per cent correct can be found in my book Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret.

A psychology study ( Nyhan et al 2014)  reveals that new facts, which debunk old myths, are most likely to be rejected when the “real facts” undermine beliefs strongly linked to a sense of identity. Darwinists – named for Darwin – fit this description more than most.

Darwinists are currently unable to accept the newly discovered 100 % proven facts that Darwin lied and the facts that those he knew in fact read and cited Matthew’s (1831) book before he replicated the original ideas in it. This would explain why the statistical geneticist Mike Weale, in defence of Darwin, seeks to re-define the dictionary definition of originate (so a replicator becomes the originator of what is replicated), why plain lies (where Darwin wrote the very opposite to what he was told by Matthew in order to convince the world of his lie that Matthew’s original ideas went unread before he replicated them) are not classed by Weale as lies. It explains also why Mike Weale absolutely refuses to accept the 100 % proven fact that Matthew originated the explanatory analogy of differences between natural and artificial selection that both Darwin and Wallace also replicated. He even denies it is an analogy – in the teeth of the Oxford dictionary definition of what constitutes an analogy can be an analogy of differences.

Of course, being named for the proven lying plagiarist Darwin, Nyhan et al's research would predict Darwinists will continue to deny the facts, because the facts completely undermine their sense of identity as traditionally Darwin worshiping evolutionary biologists. Once Darwinists admit to the veracity of the "real facts" and to the fact that the academic community has been promoting myths about the readership of Matthew's original ideas - myths started, incidentally, by Darwin, then, like a stack of dominoes when just one is removed, the entire Darwin Worship Industry will fall into intellectual disgrace.

It’s all rather perturbing. But at least Darwinists are not alone when it comes to "real fact" denial and the reasons for it.

The Darwinist's Comfort Zone

There is a link to Darwinists on this topic. It is in the conclusion. Before we get there, here is how I arrive at it:

 On Christmas Eve, I commissioned my friend the Nottingham portrait artist Gabe Woods to paint an oil on canvas picture of the metaphorical 'comfort zone'.

I want this picture to use as a teaching device for the small minority of students who complain that we are making

Mike Sutton
In my comfort zone
in Nottingham, England.

them think too hard. Honestly. I'm serious. This actually is a student complaint these days.

"Only when you leave your comfort zone," I always inform such uncomfortably-brain-hurting students, "do you ever learn anything. Be glad, therefore, to be uncomfortable in your university education."

Furthermore, I say:

"Would you otherwise wish to pay so much for what you already know - or could find out without our expert help? We are here not so much to impart knowledge - but to help you think. And good thinking - 'best thinking' is uncomfortable."

Gabe and I discussed some ideas as to how he might fulfil this brief. I've no idea what we are going to end up with. I want it to be something students can be asked to go and pay a visit to. Something they will stand before, contemplate and be - hopefully - moved and inspired by.

Meanwhile, I decided to use the BigData-IDD method    to find the origins of the term.

At the time of writing (28.December, 2015) the shameless plagiarizing editors of the unreliable so-called encyclopedia Wikipedia have no idea when the term was first coined.

I discovered that once again I can get back further than the etymological experts with my BigDada-IDD technique. For example, the best-selling etymologist David Wilton writes   :

'comfort zone, n. When introduced in 1923, this term referred to home heating. It wasn’t until the 1970s that the phrase began to be applied metaphorically.'

Wilton is right about the built environment heating origins. But the term occurred in print at least a decade earlier than his best efforts could detect - in the 'Heating and Ventilating Magazine' Building Systems Design, Volume 10, (1913) on page    30:

ESTABLISHMENT OF A COMFORT ZONE. Before working very long, it became evident that there was a temperature and humidity range within which the occupants of the rooms were comfortable.

In my opinion, far more interesting, however, is that the extremely rare phrase 'comfort's zone' occurred first, and once only, in a poem of 1819. In 'Aonian Hours and other Poems' by W. H. Wiffen:   

Attribution

Is this the etymological origin of 'comfort zone'?

Oxford Dictionaries online    has a good explanation of the concept of the comfort zone metaphor:

(a) A situation where one feels safe or at ease or settled. (b) Method of working that requires little effort and yields only barely acceptable results: if you stay within your comfort zone you will never improve.'

The notion of the 'comfort zone' is useful for thinking about how 'states of denial' help people live with uncomfortable facts.

An interesting publication on the metaphor of the comfort zone

• From Comfort Zone to Performance Management   

Conclusion and the way forward for Darwinists

The notion of the 'comfort zone' sits well with Cohen's (2001) explanations of 'states of denial'. My research into Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarizing science fraud by glory theft of Matthew's original prior publication of the full complex hypothesis of natural selection reveals that Darwinists of the present are behaving exactly like those of the past in refusing to leave the comfort zone state of fact denial .