The Dysology Hypothesis
Letting scholars get away with publishing fallacies and myths signals to others the existence of topics where guardians of good scholarship might be less capable than elsewhere. Such dysology then serves as an allurement to poor scholars to disseminate existing myths and fallacies and to create and publish their own in these topic areas, which leads to a downward spiral of diminishing veracity on particular topics.
Tuesday, 30 December 2014
British Society of Criminology Publishes Peer Reviewed Paper on Darwin's and Wallace's Science Fraud (here)
Charles Darwin's and Alfred Wallace's plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's prior publication of the full hypothesis of natural selection seems more likely than not following the BigData discovery that Darwin and Wallace were hugely influenced by those who actually read and cited Matthew's book in the literature. Moreover, a host of other new discoveries about Darwin's palpable lies that he told to achieve priority over Matthew and the discovery Wallace's patent dishonesty in doctoring a letter in his autobiography, the positive findings of a plagiarism check, the proof that Matthew's book was far form obscure in the fist half of the 19th century (for example it was prominently advertised and then cited in the 1842 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica). Moreover - though more controversially - new research methods reveal that many in Darwin's and Wallace's circles were apparently first to be second with unique terms apparently coined by Matthew.
Papers from the British Criminology Conference
© 2014 the authors and
the British Society of Criminology
ISSN 1759-0043; Vol. 14: 49-64
The hi-tech detection of Darwin’s and Wallace’s possible science fraud: Big data criminology re-writes the history of contested discovery
Mike Sutton, Nottingham Trent University
Click here to read the paper
Monday, 15 December 2014
Are you a credulous pseudo-scholar in search of meaning in science? Perhaps you aspire to being a Darwinist Troll? Would you like to argue from an uninformed and irrational viewpoint? Do you seek personal delusion? Then Come and worship at the Church of the Immaculate Conception of a Prior-published theory. Leave your brains at the door - unless your name is Richard Dawkins: Enter the kingdom of Darwin Here
Saturday, 8 November 2014
Saturday, 18 October 2014
Wednesday, 24 September 2014
Wednesday, 17 September 2014
An article on my 2014 Sunday Lecture is published in the Ethical Record
The article is open access.
Sutton, M. (2014) A Dreadful Discovery: Big Data Proves Wallace and Darwin Counterfeit Discoverers. Journal Ethical Record. Volume 119 Issue 8 .Pages 7-14 Publisher Conway Hall Ethical Society Full issue available here: http:
//ethicalrecord.org.uk /wp-content /uploads /2014 /09 /Ethical-Record-August-September-2014.pdf
Wednesday, 3 September 2014
Science Fraud: What now after the big data bombshell fell on the history of the discovery of natural selection?
Arguably, all that remains to defend Darwin's and Wallace's claims to have independently discovered the theory of natural selection and to deny they committed science fraud is an irrational trinity of faith. Click here to read my open access article that informs natural scientists of the newly discovered data and it implications.
Friday, 1 August 2014
In 2104 BigData technology revealed that Darwin and Wallace plagiarized Patrick Matthew's (1831) prior-published discovery of the 'natural process of selection' and then committed science fraud by claiming to have 'immaculately conceived it' by each discovering it independently of Matthew and of each other.
Read the findings in the book that dropped the bombshell on the history of scientific discovery. This is the book that some within the ranks of career academic Darwinists, fanatical pseudo-scholarly obsessive Darwinist trolls, and the related Darwin industry of publishers, editorial boards and 'expert' peer reviewers, documentary makers, museum curators do not want you to read. Some in those ranks would rather you not read it because it proves that for the past 154 years Darwinists have been disseminating a multitude of myths, fallacies and lies - all started by Charles Darwin - about the discovery of natural selection. Why does it prove it more likely than not that Darwin commited science fraud? Because Darwin wrote that no naturalist known to him had read Matthew's (1831) prior-published full and complete discovery and creation of the natural selection hypothesis. But Nullius in Verba reveals how big data analysis newly proves Darwin was wrong about that. Because three naturalists known to him and Wallace actually cited Matthew's (1831) book pre-1858 in the published literature! And those three - Loudon, Selby and Chamber's played key roles at the very epicenter of influence and facilitation of the work of Darwin and Wallace on natural selection pre-1858. 1858 being the year Darwin's and Wallace's papers, on their supposedly mutually independent discoveries of the natural process of selection, were read before the Linnean Society and the year before the Origin of Species was first published.
For the record, by way of reply to weird accusations currently circling on the Internet, I am a staunch atheist and have been of that position for the past 40 years. I do not believe in intelligent design and have no motive or interest whatsoever in supporting the aquatic ape theory ape, morphic resonance or any other contrarianist theory etc. I am motivated on this topic by nothing more than a desire to see veracity underpin the history of scientific discovery, I wrote 'Nullius' to reveal, with a multitude of newly discovered hard data, that 'natural selection', the greatest scientific theory of all time, was clearly plagiarized - in my opinion - by Darwin and Wallace, who then lied when they claimed no prior-knowledge of it.
This book exposes all the myths and lies started by Darwin that continue to be parroted by adoring desperate Darwinists to this very day. Nullius in Verba proves that there is only one independent discoverer of natural selection and he is Patrick Matthew.
Sunday, 29 June 2014
The current consensus is that Darwin and Wallace each discovered natural selection independently of Matthew and independently of one another. Moreover, Darwin is hailed as the immortal great thinker on the subject of evolution, because he alone is recognised as first to take his own discovery of the theory of natural selection forward, with many confirmatory evidences, convincing others of its veracity and importance.
In this talk, Mike Sutton will challenge this view with new evidence that proves that, pre-1858, Matthew’s book was read by at least seven naturalists. Three of the seven were at the epicentre of influence on Darwin’s and Wallace’s researches and two of those three were personal associates and correspondents of Darwin and Wallace. He will show that Matthew, not Darwin, should be celebrated as solver of the problem of species.
Dr Michael "Mike" Sutton is Reader in Criminology at Nottingham Trent University (UK), where he teaches Hi Tech Crime and also Crime Reduction and Community Safety. Before that he worked for 14 years as a senior researcher in the Policing and reducing Crime Unit in the Home Office in London. Mike is the originator of the Market Reduction Approach (MRA) to theft and co-founder and Chief Editor of the open access Internet Journal of Criminology. He is a winner of the British Journal of Criminology Prize for virtual ethnographic research into a pan-European hacking group.
Doors 10.30, £5 in advance, £2 concs./Free to Ethical Society members
Tea & Coffee will be available. Click here to buy tickets from the London Ethical Society
Saturday, 29 March 2014
Darwin and Alfred Wallace claimed to have discovered natural selection independently of Patrick Matthew. Matthew's discovery of the 'natural process of selection' was published 27 years before
's and Wallace's papers were read before the Linnean Society in 1858. In 1861, in the third edition of the Origin of Species, Darwin 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. Unfortunately the view was given by Mr Matthew very briefly in scattered passages in an Appendix to a work on a different subject, so that it remained unnoticed until Mr Matthew himself drew attention to it in the 'Gardener's Chronicle,' on April 7th, 1860.' To date, there has been no hard evidence suggesting that Darwin’s or Wallace’s work was influenced by Matthew. However, newly discovered literature reveals seven naturalists cited Matthew's book before 1858. Three played key pre-1858 roles facilitating and influencing Darwin’s and Wallace’s published ideas on natural selection. They are: Loudon – who edited and published Blyth’s acknowledged influential articles on evolution; Chambers, author of the 'Vestiges of Creation' – which both Darwin and Wallace also acknowledged influenced their work; and Selby – who, in 1855, edited and published Wallace's Darwin Sarawak paper. These new discoveries mean that Matthew now has full scientific priority for the theory natural selection.
The latest peer-reviewed science journal article busting of the Patrick Matthew Supermyth is here.
To read the full story - click here: http://www.bestthinking.com/articles/science/biology_and_nature/genetics_and_molecular_biology/internet-dating-with-darwin-new-discovery-that-darwin-and-wallace-were-influenced-by-matthew-s-prior-discovery
The latest peer-reviewed science journal article busting of the Patrick Matthew Supermyth is here.
Thursday, 6 March 2014
The long-busted, yet pervasive, myth that Charles Darwin's Eureka! Moment realisation of the ability of natural selection to explain the problem of species, came by way of his observation of variation in the beaks of Galapagos Islands finches is a supermyth. Darwin did no such thing. He failed to understand the significance of the variation in those finch beaks, he never collected the finches, he misclassified 7 of the 13 finches collected. He never even collected them, they were collected by another crew member. The real natural selection significance of adaptation of Galapagos Islands finches was a 20th century discovery. The myth is a supermyth because it is deployed to this day by Darwinists arguing against the myth of divine creation of new species. It is used by the uninformed, including some Darwinists, in an attempt to disprove the overwhelming evidence that Darwin’s real Eureka! Moment came around 1837 within the pages of Patrick Matthew’s (1831) full and prominently published and reviewed articulation of the theory of the ‘natural process of selection.’ Darwin claimed never to have read the book despite the newly discovered fact that other famous naturalists read and cited it - including three of Darwin's scientific associates.
Wednesday, 26 February 2014
Tuesday, 25 February 2014
Wednesday, 19 February 2014
Darwin's and Wallace's Great Science Fraud
In 1831 a Scottish laird, botanist, orchardist, farmer, grain dealer and Chartist named Patrick Matthew published his discovery of the ‘natural process of selection’ in his book entitled ‘On Naval Timber and Arboriculture’.
Amazingly, 27 years later, in 1858, Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace each claimed to have independently discovered the exact same theory. Both Darwin and Wallace admitted Matthew had fully enunciated natural selection, but claimed no prior knowledge of Matthew’s book, and to this day Darwinists and other scientists have simply taken their word for it that they were not lying plagiarizers and science swindlers.
A bombshell for the history of scientific discovery
Read my blog on the BestThinking site, which uniquely reveals the newly discovered facts about who Darwin and Wallace knew who had both read and cited Matthew's book and its unique ideas.
Monday, 10 February 2014
Check out Dawkins' video on Patrick Matthew - its full of pseudo-scholarly Darwinist mythmongery. Please read my Best Thinking blog to see the arguments based on facts - as opposed to adoration blinded Darwinist rhetoric - and to follow the debate on the Discovery of the World's Greatest Science Fraud.
Saturday, 8 February 2014
THE MATTHEW SUPERMYTH
A bombshell for the history of scientific discovery.
After a year of being wired into the net - often for 16 hours a day - I employed innovative hi-tech research methods to uniquely discover the hidden books in the library that together represent an embarrassment of new facts that prove beyond all reasonable doubt that both Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace committed the greatest science fraud in history.
My discovery of new data proves that the science swindler Darwin lied in 1860 when he claimed no prior-knowledge of the ideas in Matthew's (1831) On Naval Timber and Arboriculture. While Wallace never outrightly denied nor confirmed prior-knowledge of Matthew's book, Darwin told six lies to obtain primacy of Matthew, and a software facilitated plagiarism check proves beyond all reasonable doubt that they stole Matthew's unique phrases, terms, hypothesis and creative examples of how the natural process of selection works in Nature.
Darwin and Wallace published a number of fallacies about both Matthew and his book. Contrary to the scientific principle of nullius in verba these fallacies have been credulously swallowed and disseminated by Darwinists and other scientists, thereby compounding myth upon myth in order to bury Matthew in oblivion.
My manuscript is currently under review. But the book will be published early this year.
I've re-vamped my web sites in preparation for the trumpeting of this unique discovery from the rooftops. Check out PatrickMatthew.com for a taste of what is in my forthcoming book> Nullius in Verba: The High Tech Detection of Charles Darwin's and Alfred Wallace's Great Science fraud..