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

April Fools such as Stepen Jay Gould

The original meaning of 'April Fools' #AprilFools is a little different than how we see it today. Note also, it does not mention there being a day. Could it have gone on for a month, traditionally?

Found with the #IDD research Method [@DrMarkGriffiths]https://t.co/toQBT39ExD pic.twitter.com/SgwclbMch9

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

.

We can, traditionally, keep this up the month. But IDD research breakthrough [https://t.co/Nli3gCzRvO] revealing that once hidden fact would not be eligible for #Managerial💩idiot-REF entry https://t.co/toQBT39ExD

Interestingly, the book belonged to biologist Stephen Jay Gould pic.twitter.com/XPLmbrPSRN

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

Artificial selection and Charles Darwin

Artificially select them not to lie or commit fraud. Especially #ScienceFraud English #Toff #Darwin plagiarised original prior published conception of evolution by natural selection from Scottish naturalist Patrick Matthew
(1) https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL
(2) https://t.co/CLKiPRJoQT pic.twitter.com/G1z8fyW3J3

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 31, 2019

.

Review of book "Nullius in Verba" written by a Scot who co-owned 3 priceless letters from English #toff Charles Darwin (plagiarist) to Patrick Matthew, Scottish regional Chartist leader, naturalist and originator of the theory Darwin stole, @80_mcswan 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿https://t.co/9R6EROkiGH d

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 31, 2019

The New Research Niche: Survival of the most fit, the most circumstance suited

The new research niche created by Big Data proves Darwin is not fit to be celebrated

Or one most circumstance suited to the ecological niche it finds itself in - for various reasons. Problem for Darwin is #BigData created a new niche in research that exposed his lies & science fraud by plagiarism. His long hidden fraud can't survive now https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/hEQQMRNtEA

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 31, 2019

Richard Dawkins - You have to be kidding.

Dawkins thinks we should be proud of Darwin. Why on Earth should we be proud of a plagiarizing. serial lying science fraudster by glory theft?

On #Brexit Shambles and evil consequence. A Darwin? You mean a plagiarizing, serial lying, glory thieving anti-chartist #Toff #Landed #fraudster? Proud of that? Proud to have the World's Greatest Science Fraudster by plagiarism and glory theft? https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/lMB4Zsg5ux

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 30, 2019

Toffs are harmful artificially selected parasites

Toffs such as Darwin had good reason to steal Matthew's original ideas, lie about him  and suppress his right to fame for his great scientific breakthrough. Why? Because he was a Chartist leader.

Artificial selection behaviour of Tory Toffs who have orchestrated #Brexit goes against C19th pre-EU recommendations of Chartist real originator of the theory of evolution by natural selection, who the landed Toff Darwin plagiarised then lied about: p369: https://t.co/G5HTAGbUUc pic.twitter.com/2uG0RqLPxi

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 25, 2019

Hypocrisy in the Scientific Establishement

The likes of the Linnean Society and Royal Society need to quit fact denying and giving the sly public schoolboy silent treatment to protect the reputation of the privately schooled and landed gentry plagiarist Charles Darwin. Their behaviour is hypocritical in light of the endemic problem of plagiarism in our universities.

Doesn't help when scientific "establishment" of the public schooled, other wealthy individuals & their toadies has for 160 years been blatantly covering up Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarism of the libertarian seditious Chartist, Patrick Matthew's theory. https://t.co/E8QuuMzsSL pic.twitter.com/NYo9gw3Wp1

— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 20, 2019