Debating the facts with Darwin cultists

No. He lied. Because he knew Matthew's book was prior read & cited by naturalists. He lied about that and then called it "my theory". That is plagiarizing science fraud by glory theft. It is misconduct that would have an academic fired in his day and ours: https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/uDIXOrZQR6

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) January 5, 2019

Top Articles on Darwin's Science Fraud by Lies and Plagiary

Five years have passed the detection of the world's greatest science fraud in 2014. Today, in January 2019 the New Data is still here despite desperate malicious Darwinist attempts. Top publications on the topic, all expert peer reviewed articles, here: https://t.co/GrZRsx4CkH pic.twitter.com/NBHndduB7f

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) January 4, 2019

Would someone calling themselves a Darwinist be best qualified to investigate and evaluate their beloved and cherished namesake's involvement in plagiarism and science fraud by glory theft?

Experts in science fraud & lies told by scientists to steal the glory of others are the best equipped (not biased & silly, assumption making, 'Saint Darwin of the Immaculate Conception of a Prior Published Theory' worshipping cultists) to judge that topic https://t.co/uDWRdLPKJd pic.twitter.com/k4YLPE0yOX

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) January 4, 2019

+

Someone calling themsleves Trumpist is hardly best qualified to weigh evidence for his corruption. Similarly, someone calling themselves "Darwinist" or "Darwinite" is hardly best suited to investigate his science fraud. Leave it to expert social scientists https://t.co/uDWRdLPKJd pic.twitter.com/Y9FcSfpFOW

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) January 4, 2019

Getting it right

Actually it's Matthew's theory, not Darwin's. Darwin stole it. That image and the ideas you attach to it do not represent the theory. They represent the earlier "development theory" promoted by Robert Chambers (friend of Darwin who also prior cited Matthew and influenced Darwin) https://t.co/xnoXEJhESX

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) January 3, 2019

Darwin believed in "God" - unlike Matthew

Why not ask Charles Darwin who kept what he called "the creator" in his Origin of Species? Unlike Patrick Matthew (the true originator of the theory Darwin & Wallace plagiarised)
1. Darwin (God believer) : https://t.co/k5JUgW0NuF
2. Matthew (mocking God) https://t.co/g9nQOBNk0C

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) January 2, 2019

Just how dim can Darwin worshippers be?

#fun in #TwentyNineteen pic.twitter.com/or95CEdFey

— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) December 31, 2018

Wikipedia Prats Fish Hooked by a Sprat

Try telling that the to the cultish Darwin worshippers deleting facts on that to hide the fact Patrick Matthew's original theory of macroevolution was read, understood a& deemed highly heretical.
Trapped by a social scientist https://t.co/eQvI2LPmqc
Prats fishhooked by a sprat!

— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) December 22, 2018

+

Xmas 1859, Burglar Darwin stole Patrick Matthew's prior published theory (#BigData newly informs us Darwin's & Wallace's friends and influencers had read and cited it years earlier!) "That's a nice book with the full theory of Macroevolution by natural selection. I'll have that." pic.twitter.com/AUciIK1kOz

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) December 23, 2018

+

The @BiolJLinnSoc Linnean Journal published Darwin's & Wallace's 1858 plagiarising replication of Matthew's 1831 prior published discovery, with no reference to Matthew. Now it plagiarizes my discovery that Wallace's editor Selby prior cited Matthew's book https://t.co/ir8k9ANa5w pic.twitter.com/WHtc63C2pl

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) November 12, 2018

+

Try telling that to @RichardDawkins and his rapt cult. They dumbly believe Darwin and Wallace had dual miracle immaculate conceptions of Matthew's prior published theory even though we now know their friends, Wallace's editor and their major influencers cited it years earlier. pic.twitter.com/CIYeNNHNsH

— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) December 26, 2018

+

And when they don't get it they lie and go totally raving bonkers. It's as though the painful truth they so despise acts as an enema that makes them soil themselves in public & spread it all around like a malicious & obscene retard's dirty protest: https://t.co/icMMOyZIgT 💩💩💩 https://t.co/AgUqbWB9XJ

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) December 26, 2018

+

Each as ludicrously implausible as the other. Yes. In other words @RichardDawkins & others in his Darwin deification cult believe their "Darwinist" namesake & Wallace had dually independent miraculous conceptions of Matthew's theory. That might be even sillier than Christianity. pic.twitter.com/o80LQS8Df4

— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) December 27, 2018

On Knowledge Contamination

Thinking about the preponderance of evidence for Patrick Matthew's (1831) influence upon Darwin's and Wallace's replication of his prior-published theory of evolution by natural selection (see my expert peer reviewed science article on that issue here). I wonder if the BBC Colditz series influenced Stephen Fry, via some kind of direct or indirect (saw it himself or else via friends, influencers, associates etc) knowledge contamination to come up with the name Captain Darling in the Blackadder comedy series? See usage of an officer apparently calling Captain Tim Downing "Darling" e.g. in Series 1, Episode 9 "Bribery and Corruption" in the BBC series - available in Boxset from Amazon.

Moreover, Rowan Atkinson had the idea of setting a new series of Blackadder in Colditz: (here)  

Your prayers have been answered with a Darwin worshippers worst nightmare. Beloved beardy was a lying and plagiarising git who always kept his God in the equation. Unlike the heretical Chartist leader atheist he plagiarized:
1. https://t.co/6K7Wm5UvfI
2. https://t.co/qPsB49TRcE pic.twitter.com/sqHQrhNyQs

— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) December 13, 2018

+

Whilst disingenuous Dawkins @RichardDawkins @rdfrs mocks them, this Xmas it is hilarious to note that Christians, Muslims and his very own credulous and dishonest cult of Darwin Worshippers are all rather obsessed with blessed virgin conceptions: https://t.co/6K7Wm5UvfI 🤣🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/awqJZHfDZs

— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) December 20, 2018

+

🤣 https://t.co/GRTjHQwBBE

— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) December 21, 2018

+

We should disinter several folk from Westminster Abbey now newly know more about their heinous activities. We should dig up Charles Darwin to re-bury him somewhere more fitting for a science fraudster by lies & plagiarism

1. https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL
2. https://t.co/3XMQL72PHL pic.twitter.com/sQ3aWE977S

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) December 21, 2018

Merry Xmas Darwin Fans

Merry Xmas bonkers #Darwin Worshippers.
"It was #Christmas morning 1859, and Charles Darwin had already been at the rum and used the vomitorium in his study. Looking in the mirror he couldn't understand why there were peas and diced carrots in his beard": https://t.co/pl63bP2wyR pic.twitter.com/e1OzVVRymS

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) December 18, 2018

Darwinist Guilt Neutralization by Proxy?

Is this more weird Darwinist worshipping guilt neutralization for Blessed Darwin's plagiarizing science fraud by replication of Matthew's prior published theory and proven lies about who he knew read and cited it first?
1. https://t.co/Ts5EQd4J1m
2.https://t.co/wILiENUgvF https://t.co/K8RQPSoG6L

— Supermythbuster (@supermyths) December 17, 2018