Wikipedia Patrick Matthew Page is being Run by Putin Type Kremlin Type Propagandist Liars, Fact Denial, Empirical Data Brute Censors!

 If you take a visit to the Wikipedia Patrick Matthew page and if you can tell desperate nonsense put there by desperate Darwin worshippers to hide newly unearthed empirical data that proves Darwin lied and plagiarised the entire theory of macroevolution by natural selection, from empirical facts, why not spend time reading the newly unearthed empirical facts rationally and calmly explained. 

No wonder members of the desperate so-called "Darwin Industry" are running about like headless zombie chickens. Dr Mike Sutton's bombshell data has blown their little clucking heads clean off!

Brief outline of empirical facts, all rationally explained Here (archived for citation Here)

Zombie chicken Darwin propaganda guano on Wikipedia (archived on 21st April 2022 for future scholars to cite ) Here

Most of the Wikipedia propaganda about Patrick Matthew and its content that is seeking to refute empirical research into Darwin's plagiarism of Matthew's theory and associated lies is complete lies and misinformation that has been put there, or else contains the claptrap written by those who have not actually read the new data on Darwin's and Wallace's fraud, by those caught deleting the empirical facts on who actually did read and then cite Matthew's book and the theory in it pre-1831. 

The nasty empirical fact deleting propagandists include Wikipedia corrupt Darwin Industry support editor "Dave Souza" - fully outed having been caught out deleting new found empirical facts in an experiment (before he was finally forced to stop deleting them when his activities were recorded) and he is now named and shamed in "Science Fraud" with all the evidence archived).

The ludicrous efforts of  Dr Dagg and Dr Mike Weale are also on the Wikipedia Patrick Matthew page. Both of these men maliciously plagiarised Dr Sutton's original prior published Selby data in papers they had published in the Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. Both Weale and Dagg are now named and shamed for posterity for that behaviour and, in Weale's case far worse besides, in "Science Fraud".) All such behaviour of theirs is fully evidenced as malicious activities and is cited to fully archived sources in "Science Fraud".

The malicious obsessive lies and harassment activities of  Dr Julian Derry are all over that Patrick Matthew Wikipedia page. This vile and Darwin obsessed individual has committed dozens of acts of nasty criminal harassment via poison pen emails etc and even sent the author of Science Fraud a vile obscene anal rape tweet. Dr Julian Derry's vile obscene and harassment behaviour is fully recorded and also fully archived and referenced. He is named and shamed and fully referenced to archive sources in "Science Fraud".

Science fraud, the bombshell 2022 book is available from all good book shops and on Amazon: HERE Or direct form the science publisher Curtis Press HERE

No wonder Wikipedia is the world's worst encyclopedia. The shame of it is now published and will be read about for centuries to come.

This blog post is archived for scholarly citation. https://archive.ph/K5uyS

Could you be hoodwinked by state propaganda? If you live in the West, you already are.

 Is anyone immune to being misled by state and institutional propaganda? Are you?

Most people think they know they would never believe the kind of state propaganda that led #Germans to murder millions of Jews, #Chinese to murder millions & #Russians to murder millions. But they are wrong. They prove they are easily brainwashed. Even Western scientists, by lies pic.twitter.com/QWJrT5Zqih

— Fear and Loathing in Science (@Idk50074280) April 18, 2022

World Influencers: How can we close the "influencer gap" on liars, monsters, plagiarists and their facilitators, pseudo scholars and empirical fact deniers?

 Dr Mike Sutton v who? Patrick Matthew v who? And what about you v who? How do you do?

October 2023 and Mike Sutton's world influencer of all time rankings have become yet higher. Archived here,

Search on World Influencer rankings since 1800 Here (archived Here)

(NOTE: All rankings in this blog post are for 2022)

 

Are you on the list of the most influential? Are you ranked as a world influencer? How do your heroes or those you despise rank? 

Patrick Matthew is 100% proven to have influenced Charles Darwin's and Alfred Wallace's influencers and is proven beyond all reasonable doubt to have influenced by Darwin and Wallace to plagiarise his prior published theory of the "natural process of selection." The reason he is not ranked in the top 20 influencers all time in the world is simply because of Darwin's and Wallace's science fraud by plagiary and then their serial lies, and the falsehoods told by their adoring pseudo-scholarly fans, about Matthew and his (1831) book and who read it before they copied the theory (and much more besides) from it and then lied by calling it their own. Get the fact HERE

Darwin's World and Academic Influence (archived at April 2022)

Scientists, stop parroting myths!

 

One reason people think Darwin discovered evolution by natural selection is because the myth has been nailed to their brains by a flock of silly bot-parrots. @darwinsbulldog @cdarwin @uk_darwin @DarwinAwards @JoachimDagg @Bio_and_Philo @BiolJLinnSoc @DAILYSQUIB @CurtisPress_ https://t.co/2OxkFuQu8E

— Fear and Loathing in Science (@Idk50074280) April 7, 2022

Ahhh Coincidence! Darwin's stolen notebooks are mysteriously returned.

 All good fun.

In the wake of nation press serialization of Dr Sutton's bombshell book on Darwin's plagiarism that mocks Darwinists with analogy between theft of Darwin's notebooks and theft of his own research data by Darwinists, Darwin's notebooks mysteriously returned https://t.co/i7ztiudy0Q

— Fear and Loathing in Science (@Idk50074280) April 5, 2022

Part Four of the Serialisation of Science Fraud: Darwin's Plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's Theory int e Sunday Express (Scotland)

 Sunday 3rd April 2022 we see thee fourth instalment of "Science Fraud: Darwin's Plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's Theory" Here

Now read the facts and then, if you care about the importance of truth, do something to help stop the continuation of the credulous and ignorant teaching of false facts as education in our schools and universities. 

Get the book Here on the science publishers website 

Get the book at Amazon Here

Third instalment of the part-serialisation of Science Fraud: Darwin's Plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's Theory in the the Scottish Sunday Express

 Sunday 27 April The Scottish Sunday Express 3rd instalment of the serialisation of Science Fraud (the book).

Read it here.

What are you waiting for? This is an international disgrace. The so-called "Darwin Industry" has been profiteering of a massive lie since 1859! 

The history of science and discovery is corrupted by fake facts. 

Students must write the wrong answers to be marked right in their essays and exams. This is massively embarrassing. 

Read the facts and then help to set the record straight. 

Available on Amazon books: Here.

Serialization of "Science Fraud" continues in the Scottish Sunday Express Newspaper

 Sunday March 20 2022 saw the second part of the on-going serialisation of  "Science Fraud: Darwin's Plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's Theory" in the Scottish national press via the Scottish Sunday Express.

 . .   

The article can be read here. 

.

If you live in #Scotland you could do worse than buy the Scottish Sunday Express . The @CurtisPress_ science book that 100% proves Charles #Darwin committed the world's biggest science fraud by theft of an entire Scottish theory & lied is being serialized https://t.co/9CdwsGdpLI

— Fear and Loathing in Science (@Idk50074280) March 26, 2022

.

Another #Scottish national press instalment of "Dr Sutton Presents" in condensed instalments of bombshell data findings that prove #CharlesDarwin was the world's biggest science fraudster by plagiarism of a prior published theory. This changes everything! https://t.co/utH4HGRNN9

— Fear and Loathing in Science (@Idk50074280) March 26, 2022

Science Fraud is now being Serialised in the Scottish National Press

 Read the introduction in the Scottish Sunday Express: Here

Read the serialised, hugely truncated and specially edited for the Scottish Express Chapter 1 HERE

Buy "Science Fraud" Here on Amazon, from the Publisher Curtis Press Direct, or order from your local bookshop.

This blogpost of 14 March 2022 is archived HERE

A Further Investigation of those who were First to Be Second (F2B2): The case of Thomas Laycock

On Matthew's (1831) apparently original phrase "mental of instinctive powers."

 "Science Fraud" not only lists those who actually cited Matthew's 1831 book before 1858, it also lists (List 2) those who BigData research reveals were apparently first (after Matthew 1831) to go into print with apparently unique "Matthewisms". Being apparently "first to be second" with an apparently unique "Matthewism" they are said in short to be "F2B2".

Thomas Laycock is one of the names in my List 2. Not only does "Science Fraud" reveal his works on the theme of organic evolution, it also reveals who he associated with who were associates of Charles Darwin.

But today (11 March 2022) I discovered something more in my continued research into this area. Today, I found that without citing Matthew (1831) Laycock (1832) wrote extensively aping Matthew's work on his observations on the fact that trees that are artificially selected by humans are of inferior quality to those growing in the wild. Here. 

This provides yet more confirmatory evidence to support the F2B2 hypothesis stated in Science Fraud, the book. 

In my most recent book "Science Fraud: Darwin's Plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's Theory" there are many examples where those in List 2 are found to have been interested in the same lines of enquiry as Matthew, or to have later written about observations he first made, but without citing. Some were F2B2 and later in other publications they then actually cited Matthew's bombshell book "On Naval Timber". All before Darwin and Wallace replicated Matthew's theory and claimed it as their own. 

Schacter (2012) Provides further information about Laycock (who first introduced himself to me when I used the IDD method to see if anyone was F2B2 with Matthew's (1831) apparently original phrase "mental or instinctive powers"). Amazingly, although he wrote on Matthew's (1831) topic of organic evolution and used Matthew's apparently original term without citing him Schacter (p.115) reveals that Laycock wrote on the topic of instinct the same concept that Matthew had pioneered. 

Method

Schacter's (2012) book "Forgotten Ideas, Neglected Pioneers: Richard Semon and the Story of Memory" was found simply by typing the following search term into Google's standard search page: "Laycock" "Matthew" "Naval Timber" as in the image below.

The result I got today 13.03.2022 is archived Here. And if you scroll down the Google results first page of hits you will find Schacter's excellent book comes up. 

Next if we take the same three terms as above - in inverted commas exactly as above - but click for Google to search on books we find Schacter's earlier book also covered this topic. The image below reveals all.

As this research continues to reveal more about the previously unknown life of Matthew's 1831 book, namely who read it and was influenced by it, and who that "knowledge contamination" in turn influenced like a meme, it is important to remember that Laycock introduced himself to me because he was conjured up out of the publication record like a human spectre, living in a long forgotten book in the historic publication record. The spell that bought him forward was simply Googling the apparently coined by Matthew (1831) turn of phrase "mental or instinctive powers."

Those self-proclaimed sceptics who write in desperate defense of the "Darwin Industry" such as Professor Shermer all lacked the most basic but necessary skeptical curiosity to check their own bias when writing in support of Darwin's proven lie that Matthew's theory was hidden in the appendix of his book and that no one read it so it can't have influenced Darwin. Shermer's "its not a zero sum game" flim-flam in that regard is dealt with in Science Fraud. But really, Shermer, and all those other acolytes of the bearded God / father substitute Charles Darwin should have used Big Data analysis of the 40+million or more books and articles now scanned and in the Google library. Namely, Shermer (and others like him) should have looked at who was apparently first to be second (F2B2) with apparently original Matthewisms, as I did. Here is what Shermer writes. Note the excruciating fact that Matthew's phrase "mental or instinctive powers' is there in the text Shermer thinks nobody was influenced by (Shermer 2002) Here. 

The plot thickens as we drill down deeper for historical gold in the publication record

When we simply Google "Darwin" "Laycock" the influence of Laycock (who had apparently been influenced by Matthew's 1831 book) on Charles Darwin becomes startlingly clear. Now we see "experts" who were misled by the Matthew Effect in science not to focus their attention on the cultural tracers of Matthew's book explain the influence of Laycock on Darwin: Here

Frank Sulloway (1979) in "Freud, Biologist of the Mind" the writes on the topic here

Archived editions of this page:

13.03.2022 Here

.  . .