'So many philosophers and historians of science struggle in vain in futile efforts to prove that since the past of science is noble and glorious, it is free of error. And then historians of science undertake the impossible task of sweeping all these fine errors under the rug. And when they fail to do so, they blame."
When new bombshell discomfiting facts overturn prior mere knowledge beliefs, it is a sad fact that some scientists react dishonorably by embarking upon desperate attempts to impugn the reputation of the discover in order to bully them into silence and discourage others from learning new - palpably superior - knowledge. These dysologically unethical scientists behave this way because they have a career-stake in promoting at the expense of veracity. In sum, unethical attempts at fact burial is a career decision.
Today, for the historical record, I have taken the reluctant step of reproducing here my reply to Dr George Beccaloni - Curator of the Wallace Collection of the Natural History Museum, London.
This is done for the sole purpose of providing a published historical record of the activities of a Darwinist and Wallacist, with an international reputation, following my unique publication of the fact (Sutton 2014) that other naturalists known to both Darwin and Wallace, and their close associates and correspondents, had read and then cited Patrick Matthew's 1831 'On Naval Timber and Arboriculture' book, containing the full hypothesis of natural selection, many years before Darwin and Wallace replicated it and subsequently fallaciously claimed that neither they not any other naturalist had read it before 1860.
For the historical record. What follows is from Rick Coste's excellent podcast site. I wrote it today 24th February 2015. And I stand on my honour by every word of it.
"George Beccaloni - you sir are the "bully" in my opinion. It is just that you tried to bully the wrong person. Once met by someone able to stand up honestly against you with the New Facts, you cry and resort to dishonest practices such as weirdly pretending that my edited comment here (rapidly edited many hours before you replied to it) was an email I posted to you. You then named my employer, in a desperate attempt to further impugn my character with your proven dishonesty.
Might I point out also to readers of this site that you claim here - and in many places elsewhere - to have written a review of my book that I have already "bullied" you into confessing that you never even read before writing that review - see the written record http://patrickmatthew.com/Book...
I've been told, also, that my publisher pursued you onto one of Richard Dawkins's forums and "bullied" you likewise into admitting your same weird deception.
Now what is it you would like me to desist in George Beccaloni? Should I desist in showing that you have facts wrong? Should I desist in replying to your illogical and irrational replies to my replies to you?
I'm sorry that the hard, independently verifiable, disconfiming facts for your prior soft mere knowledge beliefs have reduced you to this George, but I will defend myself against any such desperate worm-like attacks against my character and against attempts of that kind to suppress the truth that Darwin and Wallace more likely than committed the world's greatest science fraud by plagiarising Patrick Matthew's unique ideas, prose, terms and explanatory examples and then lied when they claimed that neither they nor any other naturalist had prior-knowledge of his book. I suspect you - being Curator of the Wallace Collection at the Natural History Museum, London - are so disturbed that you behave this way because of the fact of my unique bombshell discovery that Wallace's Sarawak paper editor - Selby - had previously cited Matthew's book many times before and commented upon his natural selection notion of "power of occupancy".
Please note that this reply to you has been archived - as have all your comments on this site. Moreover, it has been put into the Twitter-sphere and many important scientists have read it. Furthermore, this particular reply to your "bully" accusation comment and a link to this website has been published by my publisher ThinkerBooks Inc"
You have demonstrated another weird habit of writing that my replies to your comments are "rants".Trust me George, this is no rant. These are hard words softly spoken."
We should seek to understand rather than condemn
Dysology.com and PatrickMatthew.comAttribution
Join the Veracity Revolution. Blame it on Google and Follow Supermythbuster on Twitter
I would like to thank George Beccaloni for at least taking the trouble to try to engage with the New Data that I discovered by way of the new technology of BigData analysis among over 30 million books in Goggle's library project. What he has done to date, whilst unethical and rather wormy, is certainly more than can be said for some other Darwinists that I have named elsewhere for their embarrassingly fallacious public statements that they doubt anything new has been discovered that has not been dismissed by others. To his relative credit, at least Beccaloni has not claimed that the New Facts don't even exist.
I hold no grudge against George Beccaloni. If he would like to start afresh once he has overcome the palpable symptoms of "veracity shock" then I suggest he do so. And we can move forward.
I am happy to continue the debate. I have nothing to hide. But any who seek to impugn my character or the veracity of my claims in order to seek to bury the disturbing New Data in obscurity(some of whom are named here) should be aware that I am perfectly capable of standing up to them and will do so in the open. Any who seek to libel me with easily provable lies behind a mask of anonymity should be further aware that I am an award winning pioneer in the field of high tech crime criminology. They will be named and shamed, and they and any other libelous author should remember the old criminologist's saying that the smart money is always on the suit. I have bought a rather nice one with my first six-months of royalties from ThinkerMedia inc.
I will fight for the truth about how natural slection was really discovered, and by whom, honorably but pugnaciously.
Thinker Media IncUsed only with express written permission
Nullius in Verba
Darwin's and Wallace's cats are out of the bag. No amount of further lies, fallacies or wishing it were otherwise can ever get them back in. There should be no more "special privileges" for Darwin and Wallace. No more special privileges for Darwinist dysology, no more "special prejudices" against Patrick Matthew.
Matthew has always had full priority for his prior-published full complete and appreciable prior published hypotheses of the "natural process of selection".
Darwin and Wallace replicated much of Matthew's unique work almost three decades after it was published and read by those they knew who were at the very epicenter of their pre-1858 work on the exact same topic. The independently verifiable hard, new and unique evidence of this is all in my e-book: Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret.