Not Killing Kittens: Only debunking myths

Twitter kittens have found a niche where they have a power of occupancy over more serious things. Alternatively : https://t.co/pPTDsi20CE pic.twitter.com/MFizzUCRrN

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) August 19, 2017

++

Get ahead, get the facts: https://t.co/WSHCuYYrBE pic.twitter.com/REjiWq16m1

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) August 19, 2017

Nullius in Burger: Bullshit Kills!

Mike SuttonAttribution

Bullshit kills!

Last week in London, I seriously offended my hosts by insisting that the pink beef burger they served my daughter from their BBQ was quite possibly not safe for her or anyone else to eat. The juicy fat and perfectly charred burger was made from the finest ground steak from their local trusted butcher, and so they insisted it was perfectly safe to eat. Safe, because it is safe to eat a rare steak. After a heated discussion (pun intended) they finally referred themselves to independently verifiable facts - found by using Google - and grudgingly, accepted that I was right. But not before ganging up on me for shamefully and ignorantly disparaging the reputation of the highly renowned neighbourhood barbecue "chef" - an Australian of New Zealand birthright who had never to his knowledge poisoned anyone with his wonderful "expert" BBQ cooking to date.

Despite their initial laughing-out-loud and angry fact-denial protests, I was right to tell them that not only are pink burgers unsafe (unless you first sear the outside of the steak before grinding it up), they are particularly unsafe for children and should never be served to them. Why is this a fact? Because the carcass of a slaughtered bull is often covered in its faeces, or that of other bulls (literally bullshit), and so it can get onto the meat. Bullshit contains E. coli, which is a lethal bacteria if ingested by humans.

Pink burgers might be safe if the internal pink bit has reached 160 degrees throughout in the cooking process, but it's very hard for anyone to prove to you that it has. For all you know they made a mistake or they are "bullshitting" in the philosophical sense described by Harry H. Frankfurt   . Where is the verifiable evidence, you need to ask.

In my opinion, when it comes to beef burgers, it is logically, rationally, better to stick with the veraciously potential life-saving guidance of the Hospitality Association    on such things as pink beef.

Click the image below for ease of reading.

Dr Mike Sutton (c)Attribution Share Alike

The Bullshit Burgar Parable

Later in the evening, my hosts turned the discussion to the difficulty I am having in getting the scientific and wider community to understand why it is important that we distinguish between truth and bullshit in the story of the discovery of evolution by natural selection.

People read my book, 'Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret'    agree with the newly discovered bombshell evidence in it, but just can't be bothered to spend so much as 5 minutes of their precious time to write a review on Amazon to help spread the truth. Why, because apparently "who cares about the truth of such matters?" I was further informed: "The trouble with you is that you care too much about the truth."

(c) Andy Sutton (c) Mike Sutton. All Rights ReservedUsed only with express written permission

Second Edition of Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret

Analogously, understanding the real, as opposed to mythical, process by which all ground-breaking scientific discoveries are made may in the future improve scientific knowledge about how to increase the rate of making new life-saving discoveries in science. If we don’t realise this we don’t realise the lesson of the Bullshit Burger Parable: namely, bullshit literally kills!

I hope my hosts come to realise that the importance of knowing how to distinguish bullshit from truth has lifesaving consequences. I don't think they will be serving their own or anyone else's children pink burgers ever again. I hope not anyway. Where the truth is concerned it is important not to try to win any popularity contests, leave that to the bulshitters, because fear of being uncouth, deemed obnoxious or impolite might cost you your own life or that of a loved one. 

The newly discovered facts in my book are as unwelcome as the socially impolite guest who questions the food hygiene of the dish served them by a beloved and proud host. And so I don't expect any thanks for conveying veracious information about dangerous bullshit in "trusted" burgers from renowned sources, and none have been forthcoming.

Rightfully, you should ask for the evidence that E. coli in undercooked burgers causes serious E. Coli food poisoning. Here is probably enough of it to spoil the day of any pro-pink burger flipper

• · http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930122&slug=1681248   
• · http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/press/times_15sep96.html   
• · http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/health/DC-Va-Child-Dies-From-E-Coli-Infection-123358208.html   
• · https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2015/12/31/10-notable-E-coli-outbreaks-at-US-fast-food-restaurants/5781451489618/   
• · http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2015/10/undercooked-burgers-likely-caused-vt-e-coli-outbreak-yet-ground-beef-so-far-escapes-recall/#.WZhshih97IU   
• · http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/you-shouldnt-order-medium-rare-7124070   
• · https://www.food.gov.uk/science/microbiology/cooking-burgers-at-home   

Do you have time to spread this important message to your fellow humans? Perhaps you don’t care enough about the truth? After all, as my extremely successful hosts told me: “Don’t you realise we are living in a post truth world?” They know that the big money in academia today, and other corporations (not their respective sources of income, by the way) is in selling palatable bullshit instead of unpalatable truth, just so long as it brings in money. And that is exactly what the Darwin deification industry does. It’s very profitable for universities that spread it. It’s very profitable for the publishers who publish it. And it’ very profitable for the authors and scientific associations that peddle it. Is money the “bottom” line (pun intended)?

(C) Dr Mike Sutton. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDUsed only with express written permission

The author's eight year old daughter understands the lifesaving difference between evidence and dangerous wishful thinking. Do you?

Darwin Cult Marketeers

Type 1 thinking is what all sly marketers prey upon to hook you in. Only the cognitively fit will survive them: https://t.co/9zJg9SLG0H pic.twitter.com/hKqGOFm23g

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) August 15, 2017

Darwin Emoji

They have even have an Emoji for plagiarizing liars. Excellent: https://t.co/ewBvj7xLVc pic.twitter.com/FIYZ8GDyvK

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) August 14, 2017

Scholarly Journal Cites a Best Thinking Article as Busting the Cohen Coined Moral Panic Myth

My incredibly simple BigData IDD method that has bust so many academic myths in recent years - including "Charles Darwin's Slyly Coined Patrick Matthew Myth   " - is once again cited in a scholarly peer reviewed academic journal article.

In this latest case, my Best Thinking article, which blew the myth that Stan Cohen coined the term and most basic concept of moral panic is here.. It is cited by Mark Horsley of Teesside University. in his article: Forget 'Moral Panics'.- it can be read here    in the Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology.

Never underestimate the ability to search 35 million publications in seconds. The method - which involves making Google do what Google does not want you to do - is fully explained in my expanded full 600 page Thinker Media e-book Nullius in Verba Darwin's greatest secret.   

Steve Hall on Knowledge Suppression

The suppression of knowledge reproduces power more efficiently than knowledge itself.

— Steve Hall (@SteveHall5582) August 13, 2017

Top Psychologist Backs Book on Darwin's Plagiarism

Distinguished Professor of Psychology Backs Book on Charles Darwin’s and Alfred Wallace’s Plagiarising Science Fraud https://t.co/5Huqb8jQiM pic.twitter.com/7ciOKB4s51

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) August 12, 2017

#CharlesDarwinHahaha

It kind of does exist in spirit (in the Orign of Species) 😎 https://t.co/sDjZDFC33k pic.twitter.com/FUFXwrMwAd

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) August 8, 2017

+

Or the plunder of prior published conceptions: https://t.co/2WQGnEqk3X pic.twitter.com/w3U0Of28pV

— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) August 8, 2017

Poem for a plagiarist

Darwin sits on the book to hide
that it contains the breakthrough
he plagiarized,
which makes him bigger
than the thieving liar he was! pic.twitter.com/5Xb1WLN5y7

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) August 7, 2017

On A.N. Wilson's Evening Standard Article on Darwin

Dysology commented on A.N. Wilson: It’s time Charles Darwin was exposed for the fraud he was London Evning Standard https://t.co/hvwNEaTW2O

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) August 5, 2017