Plagiarising Science Fraud

Plagiarising Science Fraud
Newly Discovered Facts, Published in Peer Reviewed Science Journals, Mean Charles Darwin is a 100 Per Cent Proven Lying, Plagiarising Science Fraudster by Glory Theft of Patrick Matthew's Prior-Published Conception of the Hypothesis of Macro Evolution by Natural Selection

Monday 21 March 2022

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. 

.



.

Monday 14 March 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

Friday 11 March 2022

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

.  . .

Monday 7 March 2022

Oh the Satire of it all: The Daily Squib Nails the Credulous Darwinite Zombie Horde to the floor of their own stupidity

Today (07 March 2022) The Daily Squib sets the record straight on the Charles - The Dirty Plagiarist -Darwin, the "Darwin Industry" and its enablers - such as the fact censoring and malicious disinformation spreading pseudo-scholars of Wikipedia. Here (archived here) .





The cat is out of the bag on Charles Darwin's filthy science fraud by lies and plagiarism and no amount of the traditional fact denial pseudo scholarship of the Darwin Industry can ever get it back in
https://t.co/QgQGmQ8wcM @CurtisPress_ @DailySquibs @DAILYSQUIB @SoniaPoulton
. .

Wednesday 2 March 2022

Empirical facts or conspiracy theory

 

. . https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/56010861382336513?lang=en-GB .



 .







.

Tuesday 22 February 2022

Charles Darwin, Alfred Wallace, Patrick Matthew and Mike Sutton - Who is the Beast?

😂 Is Amazon the beast? Is it Sutton? Or is it Darwin? Or Matthew? Or is it Wallace? In the name of God who the Hell is the Beast? Buy the book and read the shocking "revelations" in it to find out. Is this the "end of days" for Charles Darwin? 😈💀 

Buy this bombshell book on Amazon for the price of the "mark of the beast" and exorcise - or else exercise, your demons now. 




Thursday 17 February 2022

Darwin Trust Employee George Beccaloni is about as objective as any brainwashed Darwin fanatic about the New Data and Charles Darwin

Someone using George Beccaloni's pseudonym Megaloblatta on February 16 2022 entered a link to typical Darwin fact hating superfan nonsense on the Wikipedia page for Patrick Matthew (relevant Wikipedia history page archived here.) 

Beccaloni (claims to be employed by the "Darwin Trust") that appears to be true but he also pretends he is an objective scholar on the question of Matthew and Darwin. However, verifiable empirical evidence proves he is the opposite.

Facts about George Beccaloni and Darwin's Plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's theory

Firstly before commenting on my research into the story of Matthew, Darwin and Wallace George Becalloni dismissed it as untrue on a Richard Dawkins fans website and was caught in the act by Bob Butler my then publisher and CEO of Thinker Media. There, caught red handed Beccaloni was confronted by Butler and so was forced to admit he was commenting negatively on an academic book he had not even read. Therefore, anything Beccaloni writes about my research after that serious academic irregularity is worse than just tainted by his proven completely biased and desperate unprofessionally childish fact denial behaviour. It is contaminated by Beccaloni's proven prejudiced pseudoscientific thinking.

The 2022 post "Science Fraud" Darwinite fight-back against the facts is likely to ramp up over the coming months. Already George Beccaloni an employee  of The Darwin Trust, no less, is getting published links on the Wikipedia page of Patrick Matthew to his ludicrous blog site. Wikipedia is not supposed to link to blog sites, under its own rules. But the Darwin horde is running the Patrick Matthew and Charles Darwin pages on Wikipedia, and one of them is proven by his own hand to be not only dishonest but employed by the Darwin Trust!

 Megaloblatta publishing on Wikipedia on Beccaloni's recent published activity on to a blog post written by Beccaloni on his own site here


George Beccaloni caught red-handed dishonestly pretending - like any other desperate and panicking pseudoscientific fanatic does - to know the factual content of a book he had not even read here.

Beccaloni's subsequent blog on the topic he clearly proved himself untrustworthy to review. Here.

Why is this being added to Wikipedia today? Is it because Darwin superfans like Beccaloni, the world over, are in a fact denial panic about my new history of science book "Science Fraud" and the mass of press coverage it is receiving?

I geck them with empirical facts. They hate that, these fanatical members of the Darwinite Zombie Horde.



This page is archived for researchers, journalists and anyone else investigating the dishonesty at the core of the so-called "Darwin Industry" and its activities in publishing to promote falsehoods, mischievous misrepresentations of scholarly research and fact-denial censorship   https://archive.is/QHr9H


Friday 11 February 2022

Science Fraud discussed on the Sonia Poulton Show 11th Feb 2022 with Dr Mike Sutton