The Scots are Writing about Darwin's & Wallace's Plagiarism

It is good to see that Scots are tuning into the facts on Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarism and the English scientific establishment's cover up

Good to see the Scots are writing about how their great nation has been ripped off by the English stealing the most important theory ever originated. Come up to speed #Scotland & beware of nutjob lying crazy English Darwinite Cult trolls and cyber stalkers https://t.co/Q5l4B4vshD

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) June 15, 2019

People have trouble accepting facts

That explains why scientists simply cannot cope with the New #BigData discovery that Darwin and Wallace were lying plagiarizers of a prior published theory that their major influencers/friends had prior read and cited: https://t.co/CLKiPRJoQT

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) June 14, 2019

Let's all play "Truth or dare to lie" Who will always win in the end?

Do you really want the truth or the lies? pic.twitter.com/d0vYjgHeF2

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

Scotland has been ripped-off by the English

Don't be misled by the scientific establishment to accept tall tales, lies, idiocy and fake news regarding where the theory of evolution by natural selection really came from and who stole it from the Scots. pic.twitter.com/hazSANc93L

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

National Library of Scotland: Nullius in Verba

Take that fact deniers.

I actually am #delighted to learn today that a proud Scot (he donated 3 priceless letters - from Charles Darwin to Patrick Matthew - to the Scottish nation) donated a copy of my book on Darwin's plagiarizing science fraud to the National Library of Scotland. They accepted it. pic.twitter.com/A2wQXWVWtC

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

Watch out stalkers and malicious poison pen authors

I will be submitting a proposal based on all the emails. tweets, blog post nonsense and even Dagg's abuse and then disgraceful plagiarism of my original discoveries in the Linnean Journal

Pleased to announce a call for chapters for an international edited collected on #technologyfacilitatedviolence with @eQuality_ca’s Jane Bailey, myself & @n_henry -practitioners, academics, PhD/ECRs working in this area (all disciplines) pls get in touch @MonashCrim @Monash_Arts pic.twitter.com/hyI6JtGEpK

— Assoc/Prof Asher Flynn (@AsherFlynn) May 1, 2019

Should it be called natural SELECTION?

I have no problem with the term "natural process of selection" coined by Patrick Matthew (1831) and plagiarised into "process of natural selection" by science fraudster Charles Darwin (who stole Matthew's theory). But @BiologiaPensamt this is one for you: https://t.co/0EHAyDtOVZ

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) May 1, 2019

.

Dover's argument same as yours (I disagree) that "selection" is a confusing term. Page 9 writes: "There is no Great Selector in the sky". But Matthew NEVER once implied there was. Made it clear there was NOT. But Darwin kept the notion of what he called a "Creator" in his work.

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) May 1, 2019

.

Yes as discussed so many times. The analogous selection hypothesis is analogous to artificial selection in tree nurseries, which is Matthew's 1831 highly idiosyncratic arboriculturalist analogy, slyly plagiarised by Darwin in his private essay = Explanatory analogy for the theory pic.twitter.com/f6Rs5FLKgY

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) May 1, 2019

.

I agree on Matthew's merit, novelty and solid work, of which natural selection is a useless metaphor.

— Emilio Cervantes (@BiologiaPensamt) May 1, 2019

On Naval Timber

Were the seeds the result of artificial selection to produce curved wood for house or shipbuilding? Or were the saplings pruned and trained for the same reason? @Hollyonline - Image from 1831 book Darwin & Wallace plagiarised and then serial lied about: https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/cGT2h8GQMI

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) April 22, 2019

.

There are nearly identically bent trees about half a mile south west of Symonds Yat Rock! (picture doesn't show them very well) pic.twitter.com/vp9PsKMwUP

— Marcin Zielinski (@rat_biker_83) April 22, 2019

Matthew's Tree and Darwin's Tree - Just another tree coincidence amongst so many

.

Not exactly Matthew's drawing in this case was to explain how to train a tree to make bent planks for naval ship building. Of course he saw naval power and sea travel as key to which nation would be fittest to survive. Darwin's was of Matthew's ramification (branching) of species

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Dysology) April 18, 2019

Google Trashed Darwin's Reputation with New facts About What he Really Was and how Credulous Many Scientists Really Are

Without Google, things would be so much nicer for dead Darwin and Wallace worshippers and for Richard Dawkins' worshipping fans https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/17/would-life-be-happier-without-google-i-spent-a-week-finding-out#comment-128141898 .

Just one example of how new independently verifiable bombshell facts that disrupt so called scientific "establishment" credulous beliefs influence the mere opinions of the general public to be incurious when the "establishment" refuses to face new facts https://t.co/K2QXOa8nvK pic.twitter.com/qqrrZtrtiK

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) April 17, 2019