Trumpet from the rooftopsPublic Domain
Dr Mike Sutton - solver of the origin of the Origin of Species!
Scientists of all kinds - including social scientists - and particularly criminologists such as myself usually seek to understand rather than simply condemn the deviant behavior of others.
A few weeks ago I wrote a blog post on the problem of TWUCs (Tweets With Unintended Consequences). In that post I explained why it is that in the disembodied media of the Internet people often inappropriately blurt-publish things they later come to regret. On which note:
Thinker Media IncUsed only with express written permission
Nullius in Verba
On 30th December 2014 Assistant Professor Nathaniel Comfort, a historian of science at John Hopkins University, Tweeted a rude response to the breaking news that The British Society of Criminology has just published my peer reviewed article on the wealth of uniquely newly discovered evidence that completely and indisputably disproves the prior Darwinist mere knowledge-belief that no naturalists known to Darwin or Wallace had read Matthew's unique prior-published discovery and full hypothesis of natural selection before 1858.
My paper presents just a fraction of the wealth of unique and independently verifiable evidence in my book 'Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret' that I believe means it is now fair to conclude means it is more likely than not that Darwin and Wallace were influenced by Matthew's prior-published discovery. Moreover, as those who have been following the story here on Best Thinking know, I believe that weighed as a whole (as it should be to avoid cherry-picking pseudo-scholarship), the amount of new evidence - combined with prior evidence identified and synthesized by other scholars - means it is beyond reasonable doubt that Darwin and Wallace deliberately plagiarized Matthew's 1831 work, lied when they claimed no prior knowledge of it, and so committed the worlds greatest science fraud.
What Dr Comfort (PhD) published on Twitter about my work
Dr Nathaniel Comfort published the following extremely rude response about my paper on the Internet. The image of his tweet is shown as a screen shot on my Supermyths blog.
Twitter from the rooftopsPublic Domain
Twitter publication by Prof. N. Comfort of John Hopkins University in response to news of the publication Dr Mike Sutton's (2014) British Society of Criminology journal article on Darwin's plagiarizing science fraud.
I would like to cordially offer Assistant Professor Nathaniel Comfort the opportunity to put his earlier unexplained rudeness behind us and to explain in the comments section here on Best Thinking exactly why it is that he thinks my paper is an 'ignorant piece of #rap' . I must explain to Nathaniel, in advance, that Best Thinking has a general policy against the use of abusive and foul language - no matter how upset the user is by my unique and newly discovered and painfully dis-confirming - independently verifiable - hard facts.
Nathaniel - you are welcome to bring along into the discussion as many of your expert associates as you might care to invite to provide you with support and assistance.
For my own part, I am personally willing and very able to discuss and defend my paper, my book and the new and unique research findings that that underpin both, on my own, with any number of people anywhere.
I have sent a direct Tweet to Prof. N. Comfort to make him aware of this polite and warmly offered opportunity to appropriately engage with the new data. Hopefully, he will have the confidence and scholarly ability to stand his ground with me this time in order share his professional expertise on the subject of the history of the discovery of natural selection by engaging in a scholarly debate in this moderated and published public forum.
Unfortunately, Assistant Professor Nathaniel Comfort of John Hopkins University did not reply to my cordial invitation to rationally explain his obnoxious published outburst about my scholarly - peer reviewed - published work. Instead, with no word of explanation for his shamefully unprofessional conduct on the internet, he blocked me on Twitter from communicating with him. I think that action - as does his published use of abusive language about my new discovery - tells us a great deal about what kind of scholar he is not. Having disgraced himself by blurting expletives on Twitter when muddled by things he has not been taught from a textbook, the Assistant Professor simply runs away, refusing to stand his ground for so much as a single moment to explain his shamefully unprofessional conduct on a topic about which he claims to be expert. The shame of it!