Identity Verified Thinker in Science / Social Sciences / Sociology
Mike Sutton
Mike Sutton
Dr Mike Sutton is the author of 'Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret'.
Posted in Science / Social Sciences / Sociology

Is "Bishop of Biology," Richard Dawkins, Being a Bullying Hypocrite?

May 17, 2015 4:06 am

Richard Dawkins the "Pope" of Atheism Public Domain

Play the video. Read the message. Click the link. Read the blog.

Next: Apply your wonderful brain. Because, you, Dear Reader, as you know, should always decide for yourself.


Thinker Media IncUsed only with express written permission

Nullius in Verba

In my opinion, based on weighing the New Data, this is a case of Nullius in Verba! Because new data suggests Richard Dawkins is no different to the Christians he criticizes when it comes to having silly supernatural beliefs that both Christians and Darwinists - such as Dr Dawkins -wish to impose upon others.

I say: Read the book Richard.

Read the book that shows you, Richard Dawkins, and those who you and your 1.2 million deifying Darwin-Cult groupies so aggressively criticize, exactly how to find the hard facts that challenge and destroy such laughably unjust, hypocritical, rhetorical, pseudo-scholarly bully-rhetorical nonsense that you and your fellow Darwinists believe about the history of the discovery of natural selection.

Whatever the majority view at any point in time, in the long-run, hard facts trump soft claptrap every-time!


Trumpet from the rooftopsPublic Domain

Charles Darwin: The World's Greatest Science Fraudster


All copyright laws applyUsed only with express written permission

Patrick Matthew: The Biological Father of the Theory of Natural Selection

The facts are new. They can be read in Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret. There are many of them. And they totally dis-confirm the old self-serving Darwinist myth, started by Darwin in 1860, and aped by his credulous adoring Darwinists for 155 years. Because we now newly know that at least seven other naturalists did read Patrick Matthew's full prior-published theory of natural selection. We know this as an independently verifiable fact, because they are among a total of at least 25 individuals who actually cited Matthew's (1831) book in the literature pre-1858.

Four of the naturalists who cited Matthew's book before 1858 were well known to Darwin, two to Wallace. And three of those (Loudon, Selby and Chambers), we also now newly know, as a result of my original research, played major roles influencing and facilitating the pre-1858 work of Darwin and Wallace on the replicated theory that they are - according to Richard Dawkins and other Darwinists - supposed to have conceived independently of Matthew's prior publication of the whole thing 27 years before Darwin and Wallace.

In other words, despite what Darwinists want us to blindly believe, THERE WAS NO IMMACULATE CONCEPTION OF MATTHEW'S PRIOR-PUBLISHED THEORY! Not, that is, unless a supernatural miracle of cognitive contraception occurred!


(c) Darwin and WallaceAttribution

Miracle Double Immaculate Conceptions of the Blessed Virgins Darwin and Wallace of Matthew's prior published hypothesis of natural selection

Darwinists have a choice now: Adapt or dysology. Only one choice is rational.

Personally, I don't care what nonsense Darwinists wish to believe. What I do object to is that they insist on imposing it on others by teaching what amounts to a silly belief in a supernatural miracle in our schools and universities,

The Darwinist pseudo scholarly version of the history of the discovery natural selection is about turning fallacious statements, made by their namesake, into unshakable truths through the power of institutions and the passage of time.

NOTE: For more information on Matthew, visit

There are currently no comments. to Shut Down Permanently on December 31, 2017

If you want to save a copy of your content, you must do so before the website shuts down on December 31, 2017. We will NOT be able to provide any assistance after the website shuts down. We are available at only until the shutdown to provide more information and assistance.

It was a noble 10-year experiment, but it turns out that the writers with the best content are the least adept at the tech required to publish under our model, which in hindsight, makes perfect sense. If you are dedicating your life to becoming an expert in your specialty, you don’t have a lot of time left for figuring out publishing tech.

It hasn't helped that we have entered an age of unprecedented polarization and antagonism which doesn't foster demand for a website dedicated to the respectful engagement of diverse views.

Thank you, everyone!

Latest Ebooks