On fact denial

What non religious, but science mere knowledge-belief believers do doubt is that the independently verifiable dis-confirming evidence for their beliefs exists. Moreover, they wish to make you merely believe it does not exist either.

Nullius in verba
https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/vGRI44eECO

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) December 7, 2017

+

"Never interrupt your enemy in a mistake"
Napoleon Bonaparte.

— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) December 7, 2017

Establishment toadies are stultifying social mobility

The Sutton Trust explains that social mobility in UK is stultified by those at the top keeping others down with unjust mechanisms fueled by bias. Patrick Matthew explained this in 1831. Was one reason his bombshell book was deemed heretical & seditious
https://t.co/gQl2driEFV pic.twitter.com/SghZybpJth

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) December 3, 2017

In 1831 Patrick Matthew included the social harm caused by exclusive interbreeding and opportunity blocking by those in the higher echelons of society who operate to keep others down and out.

For that reason, as well as the heresy of his book in its mocking of the notion of a "God" as the origin of species and their extinction, Matthew's book was criticised. In particular, as text quoted below from a lengthy and prominent book review, people were implored to not even consider such heretical and seditious notions. 

To this day, table scrap chasing creepily ambitious brown nosing toadies of the upper echelons of the scientific establishment still wish you not to read or ruinate on such notions as Darwin's plagiarism of Matthew, which was facilitated by such brute condemnation and censorship. 

The United Service Journal and Naval and Military Magazine published an extended review in the 1831 Part II and 1831 Part III numbers of the magazine. Here is the proof from page 457 of the United Services Journal review of Matthew's (1831) book :CLICK HERE    to access the actual book and the very text in the image below.

Wikipedia, lickspittle establishment brown nosing editor fraud proven. Click  here to see the experiment and results.

To this Day Lickspittle Establishment Toadies still Seek to Censor the Verifiable Facts on Social Mobility and Natural Selection first Published in a book by Patrick Matthew

To this day. creeping neardowell lickspittle academic failure establishment toadies still seek to censor the verifiable facts on social mobility and Natural Selection first published in an 1831 book by Patrick Matthew https://t.co/kbqj6GhVp8 pic.twitter.com/GbCWj4Jodi

— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) December 3, 2017

~

Errol Churchyard

The Carse of Gowrie Sustainability Group received National Lottery Heritage funding to create and mark the Patrick Matthew Trail in the Carse of Gowrie. This is the latest marker to go on the trail. Photograph, courtesy of Ian Bell.

Errol graveyard in Scotland, @C_MAlexander @M_Wainwright_UK @BiologiaPensamt where Patrick Matthew's last resting place was recently discovered, is now marked with an information board on the life & works of the true originator of the theory of macroevolution by natural selection pic.twitter.com/Z1rEK27aut

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) December 2, 2017

Seasonal Greetings

Nullius in Verba Darwin's greatest secret is on all Amazon sites. Book can be ordered from all good bookshops & libraries. The perfect stocking filler for optimistic rational skeptics in search of veracity.
Exquisite torment for silly Darwin worshippers: https://t.co/CLKiPRJoQT pic.twitter.com/6tjHkZAIHN

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) November 25, 2017

Seasons Greetings

Seasons greetings. 'Tis the time for the consequences of merry "immaculate conceptions" to come forth into the world and be known. pic.twitter.com/E1qlrrwwLQ

— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) November 25, 2017

Actually, this is one example of why you can't trust the BBC

Mythmongering BBC https://t.co/XDeFi5C4sm … credulously relplicated the long-ago busted #Supermyth that observing Gallapagos Fiinches helped Charles Darwin discover evolution.
1. In fact, he never noticed
2. Darwin never discovered natural selection
https://t.co/HoB7KtBR3T pic.twitter.com/ZaLpyA20L4

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) November 24, 2017

Some Members of the Darwin Worship Cult are Just Like Those in the Scientology Cult

Click the image below to read the latest desperate abuse from the Darwin Worship cult

Ja, ja, ja. Dr Sutton, a conspiracy theorist! That is th best i have read this year... 😂😂😂

— Emilio Cervantes (@BiologiaPensamt) November 23, 2017

Wikipedia Darwinite Editor Fraud Proven

Wikipedia Supports the Weird Darwin Warship Cult by Deleting Contrary Views held by Notable Scientists. Indeed, Wikipedia Astroturfing (fake grassroots) Agenda Editors Delete All Their Content on Wikipedia.

Live Experiment with Corrupt Wikipedia Agenda Editor Bias

ShareRetweetSyndicate

Views (1945)

May 10, 2016 4:01 am

Categories: Counterknowledge, Dysology, Internet Anti-Crime , Politics

Keywords: Patrick Matthew page, Darwin deification agenda, Dave Souza, natural selection, Wikipedia Patrick Matthew

POSTSCRIPT 2nd December 2016: Two members of the public are at last (currently at least) able to force apparently scholarly-corrupt Darwin-Lobby Agenda Editor "Dave Souza" to stop deleting facts from the historical publication record on the Wikipedia Patrick Matthew page - update HERE   

Original Blog Post

 I have blogged several times on how corrupt Wikipedia is facilitating the deletion of significant facts in order to pursue a pseudo scientific propaganda-driven Darwin deification agenda at the expense of the independently verifiable disconfirming historical facts.

To date, these Wikipedia-Agenda-Editor-Clowns immediately delete any fully referenced - even scientific journal peer reviewed  - mention of the 100 per cent proven, and independently verifiable fact that Charles Darwin lied about the prior-readership of the original ideas in Matthew's (1831) book, containing the full hypothesis of macro evolution by natural selection.

Academic corruption in an area such as the history of science is likely to be subtle. Were it any other way, perpetrators who deliberately hide significant facts from the public and their peers and students, would not be able to get away with it for very long. Subtlety is not evidence of any kind of conspiracy, it is simply the only effective way that so many criminal offences are committed by those who wish to avoid detection. And just as so many legitimate members of society facilitate crimes such as theft by selling highly specialist tools such as crow-bars, bolt cutters lock picks and slide hammers to the general public, so to do many of those involved in what we might name "academic agenda project fraud" work anonymously from the inside, slyly astroturfing   , or else simply assisting salaried academics to hide facts from the public by brute censorship in publications where they have power to delete facts that undermine any extremely carefully crafted and orchestrated agenda-view. Such subtle academic fraud, is today, and has for some time been happening, on the Patrick Matthew page on the Wikipedia encyclopaedia. Let me explain and reveal the facts:

This morning, using a relative's laptop PC - revealing it's IP address to Wikipedia and the public - I personally corrected the misleading information on Wikipedia's Patrick Matthew page   , which gave the typical Darwin deification agenda inaccurate impression that Matthew's heretical ideas on natural selection were not noticed pre-1860. The new - 100 per cent proven, independently verifiable facts, that I added this morning, set the record straight, and are highlighted in this blog post in bold and italics:

Reviews[edit   ]

The United Service Journal and Naval and Military Magazine published an extended review in the 1831 Part II and 1831 Part III numbers of the magazine; it praised Matthew's book in around 13,000 words, highlighting that "The British Navy has such urgent claims on the vigilance of every person as the bulwark of his independence and happiness, that any effort for supporting and improving its strength, lustre, and dignity, must meet with unqualified attention." The review did not mention the appendix to the book.[11]   . However, it did, in Part II, on page 457 stridently criticise Matthew's then heretical conception of macroevolution by natural selection, which in fact runs throughout his entire book intertwined with his then seditious chartist politics: "But we disclaim participation in his ruminations on the law of Nature, or on the outrages committed upon reason and justice by our burthens of hereditary nobility, entailed property, and insane enactments."

Let us now wait, observe, and see if the Wikipedia Darwin deification agenda editors allow this disconfirming fact to survive on their so-called publicly editable "encyclopedia".

I predict that this fact will be deleted as part of the 156 year old Darwin Industry's corrupt propaganda campaign to deny Patrick Matthew's right to be considered an immortal great thinker and influencer in science. If it is, it will not be the first time they have deleted this very same fact!

The deeply entrenched Darwinist myth, started as a deliberate proven lie by Darwin in 1860, that no naturalist read Matthew's ideas before 1858 was first blown to smithereens in my Thinker Media book "Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret" (Sutton 2014). Moreover, this 100 per cent proven fact, proof of Darwin's lies, along with the new 100 per cent proof of the newly discovered existence of many routes of Matthewian knowledge contamination of the brains of both Darwin and Wallace, passed scientific peer review in March 2016. See: 'On Knowledge Contamination: New Data Challenges Claims of Darwin’s and Wallace’s Independent Conceptions of Matthew’s Prior-Published Hypothesis.'   

Despite their bizarre pseudo scholarly attempts to bury Darwin's newly unearthed skeletons by fact deletion and fact denial fraud, Wikipedia and the personal pocket lining lying Darwin Deification Industry will be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century by the disconfirming facts for their published pseudo scholarly fallacies, myths, lies and corrupt propagandising.

Experiment result 1

Postscript 10th May 2016 15.38

Within 90 minutes of the correct information being added to the Patrick Matthew page, about what is 100 per cent proven to have been written about Matthew's book in a published book review of 1831, we see The Wikipedia official editor Dave Souza - who is systematically deleting facts about Darwin and Matthew on this page - has deleted the fact just as predicted. And he did so inside 90 minutes of it being put onto the page.

Even though the source of this fact is cited to the very same source already referenced, Wikipedia editor Dave Souza brazenly, fallaciously claims that it is both un-sourced, contrary to the published source, and "dubious": CLICK HERE    to see his edit of 8.58.

• (cur | prev   )   08:58, 10 May 2016   ‎ Dave souza    (talk    | contribs   )‎ . . (41,646 bytes) (-449)‎ . . (Undid revision 719532504 by 2A02:C7D:9E34:8100:6194:58D7:E3DC:219    (talk   ) unsourced, contrary to published source and dubious) (undo   )
• (cur    | prev   )   07:33, 10    
Experimental Edit by Mike Sutton
• May 2016   ‎ 2a02:c7d:9e34:8100:6194:58d7:e3dc:219    (talk   )‎ . . (42,095 bytes) (+449)‎ . . (Added fact from the literature that the United Services journal actually DID mention Matthew's heretical conception) (undo   )

Proof Dave Souza is misleading the public and systematically deleting facts on Wikipedia in order to hide the fact Matthew's ideas on natural selection were read and understood by many others pre 1858.

Here is the proof from page 457 of the United Services Journal review of Matthew's (1831) book :CLICK HERE    to access the actual book and the very text on the page he claims does not exist.

CLICK THE IMAGE AND IT WILL ENLARGE SO YOU CAN READ THE TEXT

Attribution

The text that Wikipedia editor Dave Souza claims does not exist is 100 per cent proven to exist. It is here.

Wikipedia editor/s hiding behind the name "Dave Souza" has/have done this same fact deletion thing before (CLICK TO SEE THE EVIDENCE AND DISCUSSION   ) regarding fully cited sources to Darwin's proven lies on the prior readership of Matthew's book. He claims the cited sources don't exist and when met with protest that he is lying he then is able to actually ban the complainer from editing anything ever again on Wikipedia! How corrupt is that?

Is there one or many people hiding behind this Wikipedia editor name Dave Souza?

#Wikigate

Here is an image of the entire page containing the text Souza wishes to hide from the general public as part of a systematic Darwin Industry uncomfortable fact deletion campaign Page 457 of the United Services Journal (1831) book review of Matthew's "On Naval Timber"   

Attribution

Here you have just witnessed an example of what we might call Wikipedia Agenda Editor Fraud. If ever the FBI investigate Wikipedia editors for engaging in corrupt astroturfing fact denial fraud I will make this information available to them.

Public Domain

Rubbish #Wikipedia is at it again. The weird Darwin Worship cult warmly "love bombs" #DarwinFatherhead editors deleting the entire Wikipedia content of scientists who disagree with them : https://t.co/BMQBzkOT4m pic.twitter.com/aOrGm3oi3M

— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) November 23, 2017

+

On Wikipedia Begging Letters:. In my opinion, following research, the FBI @FBIWFO should investigate Wikipedia for fraud. Their pages are not "independent". Instead, controlled by astroturfing fake grassroots) Unwelcome proven fact deleting agenda editors: https://t.co/SEp73HWVh6 pic.twitter.com/KKVa9ZFpnU

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) November 29, 2017

The Term is the Concept and that's what has confused so many scientists

It is a myth - credulously parroted in hundreds of publications - that Richard Dawkins coined both the concept and term "selfish gene". The fully evidenced mythbust is here: https://archive.li/CvdUy 

Whilst he has, to his credit, admitted that the concept of the selfish gene was William Hamilton's, he has never - to my knowledge - not ever admitted that the all the books, journals, websites etc are wrong to claim he coined the term. Since the term is the concept, that is why so many expert scientists have been confused by this and written that Dawkins coined both the term and concept.

Charles Darwin did the exact same thing with Patrick Matthew's original discovery and prior publication of the full theory of macroevolution by natural selection Matthew coined the term for his theory: 'natural process of selection' Darwin shuffled those same four words into their only grammatically correct equivalent; "process of natural selection." And, just as in the Dawkins case, thousands of scientists now write that Darwin discovered the theory. Read 'Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret' for the full story of Darwin's newly proven plagiarism by glory stealing lies and for more on Richard Dawkins effectively insisting that the (now newly discovered in print) history of repression of Matthew's ideas - due to their heresy and sedition - should be ignored and that Matthew never understood what he discovered or else he would surely have "trumpeted it from the rooftops".