Biological Journal of the Linnean Society publishes more Absolute Claptrap

Everyone knows Charles Darwin’s idea of ‘survival of the fittest', but Brian J Ford says the theory was never Darwin’s.

Read more in Nonscience Returns. Preorder now: https://t.co/aj6UPOoVTD #nonscience #brianjford #sciencepublisher #nonfiction #mustread pic.twitter.com/ES4k3mTpMb

— Curtis Press (@CurtisPress_) September 28, 2020

More amazing fact denial desperate codswallop published in 2020 in the same journal, by descent, that, back in 1858, published Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarism of Matthew's original theory. This is a ludicrous attempt to divert attention from the verfiable facts of the newly discovered data (e.g. Sutton 2015) that proves Darwin and Wallace plagiarised Matthew's (1831) prior published theory. Darwin worshipping malicious idiots Derry and Dagg are arguing - in a ludicrous attempt to divert attention from Darwin's newly proven plagiarism of Matthew -  Matthew's theory was not essentially the same as Darwin's even though both Darwin (1860) and Wallace (1879) said it was. As though Dagg the plagiarist of my research and Derry the obscene harasser and cyberstalker (facts of their disgraceful behaviour are here) know more than Darwin and Wallace did about their own (replicating) work. The Biological Journal of the Linnean Society is now  total joke. Birds of a feather certainty flock together. The facts of Dagg's plagiarism of my research in that journal are here.

Darwin in his (1860) reply to Matthew in the Gardener's Chronicle fully admitted he had replicated Matthew's prior published theory: "" I have been much interested by Mr. Patrick Matthew’s communication in the Number of your Paper, dated April 7th. I freely acknowledge that Mr. Matthew has anticipated by many years the explanation which I have offered of the origin of species, under the name of natural selection." Darwin (1861) did the same from the third edition onwards of his book the Origin of Species: Darwin replicated and admitted it when he wrote: "In 1831 Mr Patrick Matthew published his work on Naval Timber and Arboriculture in which he gives precisely the same view on the origin of species as that presently to be alluded to propounded by Mr Wallace and myself in the Linnean Journal and as that enlarged on in the present volume." Moreover, as if that is not enough to show what utter tripe the Dagg and Derry Show is Darwin himself, being one of the world's three foremost experts of all time on natural selection (those three being Matthew. Darwin and Wallace), acknowledged this in a letter to Patrick Matthew dated 13th June 1862: “I presume I have the pleasure of addressing the author of the work on Naval Architecture and the first enunciator of the theory of Natural Selection.”

For his part, Wallace in (1879a) fully admitted that he knew Matthew got there first with the entire thing he and  "To my mind your quotations from Mr. Patrick Matthew are the most remarkable things in your whole book, because he appears to have completely anticipated the main ideas both of the "Origin of Species" & of "Life & Habitat".Aso in 1879b Wallace wrote: "Mr. Matthew apprehended the theory of natural selection, as well as the existence of more obscure laws of evolution, many years in advance of Mr. Darwin and myself, and in giving almost the whole of what Mr. Matthew has written on the subject Mr. Butler will have helped to call  attention to one of the most original thinkers of the first half of the 19th century."

In their desperate fact denial smog-article Dagg and Derry  - arguably - misrepresent what I wrote on page 6 of my book. They write:  

"Sutton (2017: 6) asserted that Matthew’s theory only differed from Darwin’s and Wallace’s in the occurrence of global catastrophes"

What I actually write on page 6 of my 2017 book is (bold and underlined emphasis added here): 

"Matthew, quite correctly allowed for geological and meteorological catastrophes in his model, but Darwin and Wallace never. Matthew's original theory of macroevolution by natural selection is, in every other relevant way, apart from that great superiority, virtually the same as Darwin's and Wallace's later versions."

And relevant here - in the context of my entire book and even the rest of the content of that page - is its relevance to the evidence that Darwin and Wallace plagiarised Matthew's 1831 original theory, his original terminology and his original and highly idiosyncratic explanatory analogies.

Leading Biologist Brian J Ford @brianjford read and then reviews my book "Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret" https://t.co/CLKiPRJoQT

The image of page 6 of my book below sets the record straight on what Dagg and Derry are up to in misrepresenting my research in their desperate 2020 article

Reader: beware of desperate fact denial malicious smog-apes like Dagg the Plagiarist and Derry the Obscene Harasser who also share the nasty pseudo scholarly habit of representing their own falsehoods by misrepresentation of precise facts written by others and the context in which they are published.

I suppose the disgraced Biological Journal of the Linnean Society and its shameful publisher Oxford University Press will have no problem at all with the fact Derry provides what certainly appears to me to be a fake personal address for his serial dishonest self on the ludicrously childish Dagg & Derry Show 2020 article as 30 Yeaman Place Edinburgh, EH11, which is actually the very precise address of a pub (archived for evidence here) for which Derry wrote a scathing review in 2020. Here and archived here? In his scathing reviews of the pub at 30 Yeaman Place, Derry calls it his local since 2012. Really? How local? So local he lives in or above it? 

Typical of Derry, he posts his savaging reviews of "The Golden Rule" - his supposed address - all over the Internet e.g. also on Trip Adviser (archived here for evidence).

With extreme irony, when it comes to the topic of plagiarism and lies, Darwin said he had a "Golden Rule". Read about that fact here.

The disgraced plagiarism facilitating Biological Journal of the  Linnean Society, published by OxUniPress is at it again. This time allowing a malicious, serially obscene cyberstalker & his plagiarist associate to misrepresent my research in order to keep the Patrick Matthew Supermyth going: https://t.co/8xWt2ilXnV

Indeed, we know plagiarism from (ahem) personal experience. Plagiarists unwittingly admit two key facts: first, they can't think of anything to do by themselves, and secondly, they know your ideas are far better than theirs. Backhanded it may be, but it's a compliment!

Brute Censorship of Verifiable Facts about Darwin and Patrick Matthew

 

Amazon has not quite managed to completely brute censorship facts of my original review of Darwin's Racism'. I expect it will soon, although I have archived it for scholars interested in censorship of facts.

Please try adding a comment to it folks.

https://t.co/cysDMhw8Zd

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) October 3, 2020

.

The original review that Amazon deleted on Leon Zitzer's book Darwin's Racismis archived HERE for those interested in studying brute censorship of independently verifiable facts. 

Darwin did plagiarise Matthew's prior published theory, name for it and highly idiosyncratic explanatory examples

 We know there is an overwhelming abundance of evidence that Darwin plagiarised Patrick Matthew's prominently prior published (1831) theory of macroevolution by natural selection. The images below, regarding this inconvertible fact (hated by wilfully ignorant, fact denial, Darwin fanatics everywhere), are from my book Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret

The psychologist and Senior Lecturer in psychology, sociology and criminology Andy Sutton (who is no a relative of mine) explains the significance of the overwhelming evidence for Matthewian knowledge contamination of Darwin's brain in his Amazon book review of Nullius: 

"… in an investigation of this kind, in the absence of Darwin’s fingerprints on a copy of Matthew’s book, a circumstantial case has to be built which appeals to concepts such as ‘preponderance of evidence’ or ‘reasonable doubt’. This is not to say the case is imagined – the case is built on verifiable evidence.

I would ask readers to imagine themselves as a juror. Suppose Emma in village A invents the wheel. Several people in villages B, C, D and E see the wheel and know about it. There are paths from all those villages to village F that are known to be in use. Daniel in village F later, apparently independently, invents the wheel. Not only that but Daniel’s wheel, which is of course the same concept, is made of the same materials and has similar features to Emma’s wheel. Daniel has been friends with, and talked to, some of the people in those other villages, who we know have seen the wheel. They know he is working on a wheel concept. When challenged by Emma, Daniel claims nobody in his sphere knew about her wheel, but this can be shown to be false, ie they did know. Daniel is then credited with inventing the wheel. Members of the jury …

The wheel analogy isn’t perfect, but that is in essence the case that Dr Sutton builds, and he isn’t saying “might have read Matthew” or “might have known Darwin”, he is showing us irrefutable proof that you can see for yourself if you have internet access. There are other aspects to the argument which give further support, which you will find in the book.

So, I find the argument completely persuasive."

 And so we can be confident that the plagiarism happened. We can say that and back it up with the overwhelming evidence above, and even more besides, but without a smoking gun we cannot know exactly when or how the knowledge contamination happened. Irrational Darwin fanatics who insist that proper scholars must supply them with the evidence for exactly how and when the contamination occurred - for the other evidence it did happen be taken seriously by them - ignore the logic of their own hero when it comes to such questions of evidence:

Seven years after the publication of Matthew's (1831) book On Naval Timber and Arboriculture, in his Notebook E, (1838-1839) Darwin wrote:  

"It is one thing to prove that a thing has been so, & another to show how it came to be so." 

Leon Zitzer (2017) explains how members of the scientific establishment (excluding Darwin's understanding cited above) stupidly failed to understand that you do not have to prove how a thing happened to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, or prove on a balance of reasonable probabilities that a thing did happen:

"Mainstream scientists of the time deployed a phony outrage at the anonymous author of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, ridiculing him as an amateur scientist who did not understand science—a tactic that was so effective, it clings to him to this day. I call their outrage phony because what truly annoyed them about his work, which they dared not openly admit, was that in fact he had done a great job at assembling the evidence to prove that development or evolution was happening, meaning it was more probable than special creation. He put them to shame and they could not bear to admit it. The one aspect of their outrage that was not phony was how incensed they were that he would not go away. This truly upset them. Despite their attacks and intense loathing of him, his book went through ten editions by 1853 and kept getting better and better. Scientists were fuming." 

                            (from "A Short but Full Book on Darwin’s Racism" by Leon Zitzer)

Darwin's Racism: An excellent book by Leon Zitzer

 

Dr Mike Sutton

5.0 out of 5 stars 

Amazon deleted the following review. But, despite such juvenile silly brute censorship of the facts

by those afraid to rock the boat of proven science mythology with verifiable veracity, the exact same

review can be found on Goodreads and in on the site of the Daily Journalist. Have a read and then 

ask your self why on Earth would Amazon delete it?  Do they employ White supremacists? Are 

anti-Semites deleting all of Zitzer's reviews? What on Earth is going on at Amazon?

The original, Amazon deleted, review comes and goes on Amazon. Yesterday they deleted it. Today

(October 3rd 2020) they re-installed it. I have archived it for scholars interested in how the 

facts about Darwin's plagiarism and racism are being censored. Here.

Darwin's Racism: The Definitive Case, Along with a Close Look at Some of the 

Forgotten, Genuine Humanitarians of That Time

                                                                                    by 

Leon Zitzer

Mike Sutton's Book Review

t

it was amazing

.

This excellent book will not be read by authoritarian credulous, independently verifiable fact denial, Darwin worshippers who exist in a blissful total state of denial about the data that proves Charles Darwin was a racist, whose works - read by Western colonisers and German WW2 Nazis - undoubtedly led to various holocausts.

Zitzer provides direct quotations from Darwin's letters and book "The Descent of Man" to absolutely prove Charles Darwin believed and promoted the idiotic pseudoscience that Black people have smaller brains and should to be classified as a sub-species of human. Moreover, the scientific establishment darling Darwin believed the plight of native peoples under the heel and rifle of Westerners was fully justified as a force of nature "natural selection" as opposed to earlier and contemporary writers of his time who explained such mass murder was not natural at all but a deliberate, unnecessary, unjust and ignorant disgrace. I particularly like Zitzer's use of Lewis Caroll's work to tellingly reveal just how insidious and wilfully ignorant Darwin's influential work was in terms of allowing Western powers to neutralise their guilt and carry on killing.

If only Zitzer had read the work of various author's that prove Darwin and Wallace plagiarised the entire theory of evolution by natural selection from the 1831 book "On Naval Timber and Arboriculture" by Patrick Matthew. That book - which fitted what Matthew coined "the natural process of selection" (Darwin 1859 slyly four word shuffled Matthew's original phrase to "process of natural selection") into why naval timber was essential for colonial conquest and national superiority in war and trade - was followed by Matthew's second book "Emigration Fields", which took Matthew's bombshell ideas forward to serve as a manual for colonialization of the so-called "New World".

Leon Zitzer would, I am sure, be interested to learn Matthew's 1831 book was cited by Chambers and his orignal terms were first replicated in print by Chambers, Rafinesque and many more naturalists before Darwin and Wallace penned a word on the topic of natural selection.

Thanks to Zitzer we are now seeing the true picture of what Darwin was.

Charles Darwin served the 19th and 20th centuries as a White, bearded, fatherly science hero. In reality, he was an underhand, extremely harmful, ignorant, opportunist plagiarist, serial lying white supremacist racist of the highest order. Or should that be of the lowest order? I'm not sure what is the correct terminology in that regard.

Darwin's legions of fanatical worshippers will hate the facts of this review as much as they will hate the facts in the book that is reviewed here. Why? Because they wish others not to know that their nasty, lethal godhead is a supermyth constructed and maintained by an authoritarian establishment and credulous begging for crumbs toadies such as themselves.

You can choose to be misled by the myth of Darwin. Alternatively, buy, read and then write your own review of this excellent book.

If I have any criticisms of this book - as any review of any book should - it is the amount of untranslated German quotations that are in one chapter and the fact the author thought Darwin originated the theory of evolution by natural selection. But no book is perfect. This one should be read and it deserves to be reviewed and discussed extensively.

.

The review Amazon deleted under pressure from rabid Darwinist extremist fact deniers is here: https://t.co/JWQ1mQYjM9

Judge for yourself why Amazon deleted it. Is Amazon operated by White supremacists or anti-Semites?

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) October 2, 2020

Tyranny of the Zeitgeist

 

"Agnes Arber’s insight that “the general intellectual atmosphere of any given moment has an effect upon this history [of science] which is compulsive to a humiliating degree … we are always too much bedazzled by contemporaneity [to notice the tyranny of the Zeitgeist]"

                                        From "A Short but Full Book on Darwin’s Racism" by Leon Zitzer.

Start reading it for free: https://amzn.eu/7tBEAjI

Darwin the racist III

 .

Charles Darwin the plagiarist and racist only spoke out against slavery to be fashionable: https://t.co/nj2Nivccxe

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 25, 2020

.

Darwin plagiarised Patrick Matthew's theory of natural selection only because Robert Chambers, who earlier x2 cited Matthew, had made it fashionable, rather than heretical. For fashionable reasons also, the racist opportunist git spoke out against slavery: https://t.co/QhFvpjyu03

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 25, 2020

. Darwin's Racism: The Definitive Case, Along with a Close Look at Some of the Forgotten, Genuine Humanitarians of That Time by Leon Zitzer
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This excellent book will not be read by authoritarian credulous, independently verifiable fact denial, Darwin worshippers who exist in a blissful total state of denial about the data that proves Charles Darwin was a racist, whose works - read by Western colonisers and German WW2 Nazis - undoubtedly led to various holocausts.

Zitzer provides direct quotations from Darwin's letters and book "The Descent of Man" to absolutely prove Charles Darwin believed and promoted the idiotic pseudoscience that Black people have smaller brains and should to be classified as a sub-species of human. Moreover, the scientific establishment darling Darwin believed the plight of native peoples under the heel and rifle of Westerners was fully justified as a force of nature "natural selection" as opposed to earlier and contemporary writers of his time who explained such mass murder was not natural at all but a deliberate, unnecessary, unjust and ignorant disgrace. I particularly like Zitzer's use of Lewis Caroll's work to tellingly reveal just how insidious and wilfully ignorant Darwin's influential work was in terms of allowing Western powers to neutralise their guilt and carry on killing.

If only Zitzer had read the work of various author's that prove Darwin and Wallace plagiarised the entire theory of evolution by natural selection from the 1831 book "On Naval Timber and Arboriculture" by Patrick Matthew. That book - which fitted what Matthew coined "the natural process of selection" (Darwin 1859 slyly four word shuffled Matthew's original phrase to "process of natural selection") into why naval timber was essential for colonial conquest and national superiority in war and trade - was followed by Matthew's second book "Emigration Fields", which took Matthew's bombshell ideas forward to serve as a manual for colonialization of the so-called "New World".

Leon Zitzer would, I am sue be interested to learn Matthew's 1831 book was cited by Chambers and his orignal terms were first replicated in print by Chambers, Rafinesque and many more naturalists before Darwin and Wallace penned a word on the topic of natural selection.

Thanks to Zitzer we are now seeing the true picture of what Darwin was.

Charles Darwin served the 19th and 20th centuries as a White, bearded, fatherly science hero. In reality, he was an underhand, extremely harmful, ignorant, opportunist plagiarist, serial lying white supremacist racist of the highest order. Or should that be of the lowest order? I'm not sure what is the correct terminology in that regard.

Darwin's legions of fanatical worshippers will hate the facts of this review as much as they will hate the facts in the book that is reviewed here. Why? Because they wish others not to know that their nasty, lethal godhead is a supermyth constructed and maintained by an authoritarian establishment and credulous begging for crumbs toadies such as themsleves.

You can choose to be misled by the myth of Darwin. Alternatively, buy, read and then write your own review this excellent book.

If I have any criticisms of this book - as any review of any book should - it is the amount of untranslated German quotations that are in one chapter and the fact the author thought Darwin originated the theory of evolution by natural selection. But no book is perfect. This one should be read and it deserves to be reviewed and discussed extensively.

View all my reviews

Darwin the Racist II

 This blog follows on from Darwin The Racist 1

.

To make a totalitarian regime work successfully within the scientific establishment you need high functioning, authoritarian brains in positions of power and influence who are supported in their rhetoric and sly/delusional anti-scientific machinations by an army of credulous toadies all scrabbling for favours by acting as their shock troop harassment fanatics. Those high-functioning people will be cultured and thoughtful, but they will be in a state of denial of the facts, because they are blinded by their subjective beliefs and associated ideas. Here you can see the verifiable proof of such individuals at work in terms of the plagiarism of my research, supported by the science fraud by plagiary facilitating Linnean Society and its Chief Editor.   

Charles Darwin is a proven plagiarist of the entire theory of macroevolution by natural selection and a serial lying glory thief. The fully independently verifiable proof here, here and here. But the totalitarian Darwin Worship cult, operating within our bastions of science is seeking to bury the truth.

Charles Darwin was also a racist, who may well have caused The Holocaust. 

#DarwinTheRacist #DarwinThePlagiarist

"Darwin did not extrapolate racism from his ideas about evolution. He brought racism to evolution and natural selection, not the other way around." (from "A Short but Full Book on Darwin’S Racism" by Leon Zitzer)https://t.co/GsncOIywLm

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 24, 2020

.

Charles Darwin - the world's greatest science fraudster by plagiarism and associated serial lying glory theft - was also a racist, who's book "The Descent of Man" influenced many a holocaust - and was a decidedly nasty anti-Irish #ToffPillock beardy turd: https://t.co/mYAoF1BmPW

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 24, 2020

How does this data alter the probability Darwin and Wallace really did have dual virgin conceptions of a prior published theory?

The answer to the question that is title of this blog is that it changes it hugely. It is far more likely than not they plagiarised Patrick Matthew's prior published theory of evolution by natural selection. 

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

2. Nullius in Verba Darwin's greatest secret: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nullius-Verba-Darwins-greatest-secret/dp/1541343964

.

The correct scientific question to ask is:

How does this new data alter the probability Darwin and Wallace really did have dual virgin conceptions of a prior published theory?https://t.co/jXLyNhJXsf pic.twitter.com/dSleOmy6R5

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 20, 2020

Darwin The Racist's Statues are at Risk of Being Torn Down: Don't forget his plagiary may have caused the Holocaust too

 Charles Darwin was a racist: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2672903/ . Like so many sly racists, he engaged on racist projects, yet strove to pretend to the world that he was not a racist white supremacist. But he gave himself away in his own words. Darwin worshippers - many part of the Darwin Industry -  have tried to downplay and even deny the reality their hero was a nasty racist. All you need do is read the facts that flowed from Darwin's own pen - versus the tortured fact denial desperately dishonest interpretations of Darwinite superfanatics.  

Darwin was a sly racist, who did a great deal of harm in his subtle racists writings. 

Darwin, like so many racists in the public eye, presented one face to the world and another privately, whilst doing great harm undercover.

Disgusting Darwin the plagiarist science fraudster and his wife (who was also his cousin), privately and with incredible sly insensitivity (even for the Victorian era) gleefully nicknamed one another with the N word: https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/search/?keyword=nigger&tab= and in doing so they privately, but, slyly, never in public, childishly mocked the plight of slaves.

There is much racism in Charles Darwin's (1874) book "The Descent of Man"

Darwin thought he was superior to others - who he thought were lower "races" of humankind and he bragged gloatingly about that: https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/DCP-LETT-13230.xml

There are, seemingly, moves afoot to remove offensive statues of Charles Darwin this year. Darwin was essentially a racist who also thought genocide was a natural - and beneficial -  phenomena of nature. Not only that, he probably caused the genocide of the Jews in the WW2. See my blog post on the evidence: https://patrickmathew.blogspot.com/2019/09/did-darwins-plagiarism-and-lies-cause.html Moreover, Darwin thought that White people are superior to people of colour and that the murderous rampages of his own kind was evidence of natural selection: https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/DCP-LETT-2503.xml

There are moves afoot to tear Down the Darwin worshipping statues of "Darwin the Racist". Those who agree with that might like to consider his role - by plagiarising science fraud - in the Holocaust: https://t.co/H24sKXShxz pic.twitter.com/OJJNtIBfq1

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 9, 2020

Being a racist, Charles Darwin - just like Patrick Matthew, from whom he plagiarised the entire theory of macro evolution by natural selection - also thought Anglo Saxons to be superior humans at the pinnacle of human evolution compared to other ethnic groups they preyed upon. https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/DCP-LETT-3439.xml

I was alerted to some of the examples - in his letters - of Darwin's racism in this very good book on the topic : https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07965ZXFS/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_d_asin_title_o02?ie=UTF8&psc=1

~~~

Why do we hate? When it comes to mass murder and genocide, behind that is always: "Someone who personifies a type of ideology for the masses, that convinces people there is an enemy out there"

White supremacist & plagiarist Darwin was such a person. https://t.co/VsvKOVdIgW pic.twitter.com/80y9Ez4qbF

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 16, 2020

. style="clear: both; text-align: center;">

Charles Darwin bought a rifle and pistols because, in his own words, he was anticipating killing native islanders on his Voyages of the Beagle: https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/DCP-LETT-121.xml

Get the facts, not the Corrupt Darwin Industry, fact denial pseudo-scholarship!

FACTS sold HERE

.

Darwin did that by regularly calling other peoples "savages" "cannibals", even the "N" word. Today Darwinists use Darwin as their figurehead to portray anyone who writes truth about his plagiarism, associated serial lies & racism as "The enemy out there": https://t.co/6idOHPWGUw https://t.co/Gq6LAiAiG2 pic.twitter.com/AFLxMWLgJI

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 16, 2020

Biologist just told me that my bombshell book "Nullius in Verba: Darwin's Greatest Secret" is reason Biological Journal of Linnean Society @BiolJLinnSoc & it's publisher @OxUniPress is repeat plagiarising my original research. Facts https://t.co/yVTTd42PB0 They're being malicious pic.twitter.com/hxhWmn0gNw

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 2, 2020

. 

.

The taking of the lives of people who were not White Europeans, by White Europeans, was seen by Darwin as a process of natural selection of the most intelligent. Only because he was a White supremacist did it not occur to him that this was genocide by artificial selection. pic.twitter.com/7QZjdyrADP

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 21, 2020

Faith in the honesty and supposed original genius of a proven liar and sly plagiarist is not science

Why do you believe in Charles Darwin? Why credulously believe in anything just because someone in authority says you should?  

Which scientific discovery/fact that you learned was most responsible for you turning away from religion and superstition towards science and reason?

— Dr Mark D'Arcy (@markoftheD) September 8, 2020

.

Like understanding difference between being told by scientists such as @RichardDawkins to simply believe in the proven liar and plagiarist Darwin and to ignore the verifiable evidence of his guilt versus the evidence of his great science fraud by plagiary: https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) September 8, 2020