Big Data, Evolution of Human Thought, Spread of Ideas and Evidence for Plagiarism

Spot on! Thank you: @Viktor_MS & @kncukier "We can now discover when certain words of phrases were used for the first time, or became popular, knowledge that spreads new light on the spread of ideas and the evolution of human thought..."

Confirmed : https://t.co/waIQjoe3EE pic.twitter.com/6A3sM3m3sK

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 13, 2018

+

Author boasts of #plagiarism in #LinneanJournal of my #culturomics original unearthing in 19th century #TextualFossilRecord that Selby (Wallace's Sarawak paper editor) cited Matthew's prior publication of the theory of macroevolultion by natural selection https://t.co/ckeNLx1kVY pic.twitter.com/Bo3NyyMM30

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 13, 2018

+

#WikipediaHahaha https://t.co/OTKDko8VcG

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) June 14, 2018

+

#LinneanSocietyScandal
1st July 1858 reading of Darwin's & Wallace's Linnean Society papers.
Both failed to cite Matthew's theory they replicated.
2018 Dagg's Linnean Society paper (arguing that neither plagiarized the originator) plagiarizes my Selby cited Matthew discovery! pic.twitter.com/35kC9UEXg8

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 14, 2018

The Linnean Journal Scandal: A Tale of Stalking, Intimidation and Plagiarism

Knowing the stresses faced by academics in the modern #ToxicUniversity, those with commercial & ideological interests to bury the verifiable scientific facts he revealed went after him at his place of work intimidating his managers. They succeeded in making him ill. @lizmorrish pic.twitter.com/TzmzsXaHCH

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) June 15, 2018

+
I HAVE A SIMILAR STORY OF NASTY, MALICIOUS VENDETTA HARASSING AND INTIMIDATION  OF UNIVERSITY MANAGEMENT AND TOP PROFESSORS  TO TELL AND I WILL BE TELLING IT ALL IN DECEMBER 2018  (SEE DETAILS)

One of these nasty #stalker #trolls severely intimidates one of my PhD students, @TeessideSitP another tries to have me fired for discovering disruptiv new data, then their 3rd associate plagiarizes my discovery and publishes it in Linnean Journal! https://t.co/T8aN5JhTyW pic.twitter.com/DHQVxWPhzQ

— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) June 9, 2018

+

The issues at stake - notably academic freedom - is something Laurie Taylor is interested in @JayneEEgerton The story has many dimension but the institutional backdrop should interest all academics that care about academic integrity as much as @Criminotweet does

— Andy Wilson (@a8drewson) June 7, 2018

+

Never mess with a former Home Office Senior Research officer trained for years in PR to deal patiently with intimidation and harassment.
Just for starters, my story is now to be included as a published case study in the field of #CriticalUniversityStudies https://t.co/rHHqQjVzx9 pic.twitter.com/iMhrx6ejPd

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 9, 2018

+

In December 2018 I will be publicly shaming the recent plagiarism and pseudo scholarly Wikipedia bragging about the plagiarism of my discovery about Selby having read and cited Matthew. The #LinneanJournalScandal : https://t.co/rHHqQjVzx9

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 11, 2018

+

#CriticalUniversityStudies: "...dedication to truth, fair play, and reasonable debate, of freedom of thought, ... that is now being cavalierly dismantled by people who do not have the wit to understand its meaning or significance for our civilization." https://t.co/DzE0sHxd9A!

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 12, 2018

+

#Wikipedia editors make stuff up. This is supposed to be about me. But they just made some of it up. Why? Wikipedia is hilarious. Yet you still get people who believe what it publishes. Why? No better than the Sunday Sport. Probably far less factual. https://t.co/KsvUzUkwDR pic.twitter.com/pGsX3MHZeU

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

+

They believe (by denying the facts of the New Data) that Darwin and Wallace had immaculate independent conceptions of the very theory their friends, influencers and influencer's influencers read and then cited before Darwin and Wallace replicated it and claimed it as their own pic.twitter.com/jXGOMHurY9

— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) June 13, 2018

Google A.I is Reducing Google Functionality

A.I has now lost even more of Google's earlier ability to find hidden texts in historic public record. Unless you know reference it no longer detects anything that forms the new uncovered references data in the Matthew, Darwin & Wallace Plagiarism Scandal https://t.co/waIQjoe3EE

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 8, 2018

Some peer reviewed papers on the scandal and what I uniquely found with the IDD method

1. http://britsoccrim.org/volume14/pbcc_2014_sutton.pdf

2. http://www.nauka-a-religia.uz.zgora.pl/index.php/pl/czasopismo/46-fag-2015/921-fag-2015-art-05

+

As a criminologist, I am rather surprised my research into illicit markets for stolen goods & stolen ideas would lead to a discovery that apparently confirms fears #ArtificialIntelligence (#AI) poses big problems for important human knowledge progression https://t.co/waIQjoe3EE pic.twitter.com/myqEDzSpbt

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 8, 2018

The Matthew, Darwin and Wallace Linnean Society Scandal: A Most Unsettling Science Story

Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Kenneth Cukier (2013, p. 78), in their excellent book 'Big Data', explain what data is:

"To datafy a phenomenon is to put it in a quantified format so it can be tabulated and analysed."

That is exactly what I did in 2013 when I originally unearthed the fact, and published it in 2014 in my book 'Nullius in verba: Darwin's greatest secret' and a peer reviewed article, that besides Loudon (a naturalist) six other naturalists, out of a total of 25 people - many of whom were agriculturalists -  all of them (apart from Loudon) originally unearthed by me, cited Matthew's (1831) book before Darwin's and Wallace's Linnean Society journal replication of his theory without citation.

Prior to my research, the world's leading Darwin scholars, including Royal Society Darwin Medal winners de Beer and Mayer, wrote in esteemed scholarly published texts that they believed that no naturalist had read Matthew's original ideas before Darwin and Wallace replicated them in 1858. I bust that beloved science myth by identifying seven naturalists who did. Six of the seven are my original discoveries.

Therefore, when Dagg used my data on Selby in the Linnean Journal in 2018 without citing me as its discover it is my opinion that he plagiarised it. More so, by dong that he has given the impression in the Linnean Journal that he discovered it first. Moreover, Dagg knew that I did. But I published it first and Dagg well knows that fact because he has been obsessing about my work in this area and obsessing about my work on other unrelated topics in his online publications since 2014. On this serious issue, the tweets in this blog post direct you to an earlier longer post that provides all the details in this latest scene in the Matthew, Darwin and Wallace Linnean Society Scandal.

@UnsetSciStories Here is an unsettling science story

Academic uses my originally unearthed finding. Fails to cite me for it in Linnean Journal @BiolJLinnSoc Then brags on #Wikipedia about it to a malicious cyber stalker intimidator of my PhD student! https://t.co/tvgtt3FThh pic.twitter.com/7PIoU6z4iS

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 6, 2018

+

This is what they tried to do to me & still try to do. @lizmorrish How a victim tells their story with all its implications in a way that does not allow them to be falsely portrayed as a nutter with a persecution complex is a challenge to be PR managed. https://t.co/E8sdLN6Sbt

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 7, 2018

+

Yes I am Liz. And that narrative is to be fully supported by independently verifiable paper letter, newsprint, email and archived website and blog site evidence. I will share it with you for your important groundbreaking academic research into this area.

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 7, 2018

+

The issues at stake - notably academic freedom - is something Laurie Taylor is interested in @JayneEEgerton The story has many dimension but the institutional backdrop should interest all academics that care about academic integrity as much as @Criminotweet does

— Andy Wilson (@a8drewson) June 7, 2018

+

On camera, public meeting, press and senior academics present:

I have & will present data @TeessideSitP re malicious fact denial toadying shock troops for preservation of sacred science myths preying on "risk society" corporate university problem to harass into silence researchers who uncover disturbing new evidence: https://t.co/4xWGfK4cG0

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 7, 2018

Not an obscure writer on forest trees at all

In my research on Matthew I have proven many times that contrary to the Darwinite myth, he was not simply an unread obscure writer on forest trees.

Here, in this one further example, we see Matthew's (1831) book (which contains the original conception of macro evolution by natural selection) cited and praised in relation to information about spreading soot around plants to improve their growth. My book (Sutton 2014 & 2017) on the topic reveals that years before Darwin and Wallace replicated Matthew's original breakthrough ideas without citation that Matthew was read and cited many times, not only in the Encyclopedia Britannica, but at least 25 times, seven by naturalists, four of whom (Loudon, Chambers, Selby and Jameson) were at the epicentre of their influence.

The Gardener's Magazine and Register of Rural & Domestic Improvement, (1837) Volume 3. pp 517-518

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_TdNAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA518&dq=matthew+naval+timber+fertilizer+charcoal&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIjqfhmbvbAhWLKsAKHQqVAo0Q6AEILDAA#v=onepage&q=matthew%20naval%20timber%20fertilizer%20charcoal&f=false

The Daily Mail On Matthew 2018

4th June 2018, The Daily Mail hails Patrick Matthew as an unsung hero whose ideas Darwin replicated 4 years after the Scottish Daily mail broke the story of my original discovery who Darwin know who really did read Matthew's breakthrough https://t.co/QlQKUHhQJH pic.twitter.com/4P2vkDZuP2

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 4, 2018

Big Data IDD Method Metrics

Some informative metrics are perfectly harmless and have no silly-billy backfire policy implications whatsoever. https://t.co/waIQjoe3EE pic.twitter.com/nyi5LxjIeG

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 4, 2018

GoogleBrag

#GoogleBrag

Shameless top ranking self-promotion Twitter campaign #JustGoogle ....'

The idea?

Your work must be on the 1st page of hits

1 rule = No names. Only terms or phrases

Mine=Just Google "Nullius in Verba"

I challenge @DrMarkGriffiths @Hollyonline @EdzardErnst

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 3, 2018

Problematizing the licit market for stolen ideas

Google Scholar: always there to remind you that (if you do) you have an international reputation Alerted me today to piece citing my research on stolen goods. A short leap from that to research on science fraud by plagiarism and the market for stolen ideas https://t.co/0m9F9cPFD1

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 2, 2018

Available from Amazon and all good bookshops e.g:  Amazon.co.uk 

On December 6th 2018, will be giving a talk to Teesside Skeptics on the problem of the market for stolen ideas and how it motivates plagiarism. The presentation will focus upon the apparent general reluctance of the scientific "establishment" to admit proven mistakes in wrongful attribution of priority to its beloved science heroes.

 I will be unleashing a no holds barred humorous and entertaining merciless expose analysis of fully evidenced case study material of various desperate and malicious attempts made by members of the scientific community and others to silence me for having the temerity to use disruptive Big Data technology to originally unearth the fact that, as opposed to the old beloved science myth of none, the book containing Patrick Matthew's (1831) prior published origination of macroevolution by natural selection was cited by naturalists. Among them, four were at  the pre-1858 epicentre of influence upon Darwin and Wallace, before they replicated it, called it their own and Darwin deliberately lied by claiming alternately that no naturalist/no single person had ever read Matthew's bombshell breakthrough before he and Wallace supposedly independently conceived so much of it. Event details here

Further expert peer reviewed academic journal reading for anyone wishing to know what - that most amusingly has so upset some fact-denial abusive pseudo scholars - exactly, has been newly discovered, and how my despicable original unearthing discoveries were made:

1.  The hi-tech detection of Darwin’s and Wallace’s possible science fraud: Big data criminology re-writes the history of contested discovery. Here

2.  On Knowledge Contamination: New Data Challenges Claims of Darwin’s and Wallace’s Independent Conceptions of Matthew’s Prior-Published Hypothesis. Here

3. Using Date Specific Searches on Google Books to Disconfirm Prior Origination Knowledge Claims for Particular Terms, Words, and Names. Here

+

This is what a plagiarizer or other science fraudster might do when they have been caught out. It's known as the @JohnCleese "John Cleese Manavure"https://t.co/Rkqjz2O28A

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 6, 2018

You get new facts not just knowledge-gap filling wrong mere opinions when n=all

And new technology of #BigData where n=all detects hidden data that reveals fraud, plagiarism and knowledge contamination routes from originators to those who claimed independent conception of prior published ideas, terms and examples https://t.co/O8hzytSiRj pic.twitter.com/znjEMEAgRv

— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) June 1, 2018