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'.
 

Categories

This Blog has no active categories.
 
Close  
Posted in Science / Social Sciences / Sociology

Happy New Year 2016: On How Best Thinking Can Change the World for the Better

Jan. 1, 2016 8:04 am
image

Attribution

Wikipedia

185 years ago to this day, 1st January 1831, the greatest scientific discovery of all time was published. Blacks of Edinburgh and Longman and Co of London published Patrick Matthew's famous hypothesis of natural selection. The great idea was contained in his remarkable book 'On Naval Timber and Arboriculture.' . It was the first complete explanation of macroevolution by natural selection.

Matthew's 'natural process of selection' was written as a hypothesis for the origin of species in both the main body of his book and in its appendix.

image

Attribution

On Naval Timber and Arboriculture by Patrick Matthew (1831)

Today, I am delighted to see that on this New Year's Day 2016, Wikipedia editors have at last overthrown their membership's earlier active involvement in a synchronised 'state of denial' of facts by the Darwin Publishing Industry, Royal Society, Linnean Society and British Association for Advancement of Science. Because, today, Wikipedia editors have finally stopped censoring the truth by deleting independently verifiable and significant facts and have instead added to the Wikipedia Patrick Matthew page the details and significance of my original BigData facilitated discovery, published by ThinkerBooks (Sutton 2014) that naturalists - who influenced and were well known to Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace and their influencers, friends and facilitators - in fact did read and also cited pre-1858 - Patrick Matthew's (1831) full prior publication of the hypothesis of natural selection years before Darwin (1858,1859) and Wallace (1855 and 1858) replicated it, along with Matthew's original terminology (for example, Darwin uniquely 4-word shuffled Matthew's original term 'natural process of selection', into 'process of natural selection' ) and original explanatory examples - such as Matthew's original 'artificial versus natural slection analogy of differences', which Wallace (1858) replicated in his Ternate paper and Darwin (1859) used to open the first chapter of The Origin of Species.

image

Attribution

Proof Darwin Lied and Engaged in Fraudulent Glory-Theft

image

Public Domain

The Royal Society Darwin Medal

Wikipedia's honesty on this hugely sensitive and embarrassing issue for the international scientific community is a huge breakthrough in spreading the veracity of the New Data, because both Darwin and Wallace fallaciously excused their replications by claiming no one had read Matthew's (1831) original ideas before they replicated them. Moreover, the Darwin Industry, led by such figures as the esteemed Royal Society Darwin Medal winners Sir Gavin de Beer and Ernst Mayr (among many others) have gone into peer reviewed print to promote that fallacy - started as a deliberate lie, written by Darwin in 1860, who had been informed by Matthew (1860) that the exact opposite was true.

image

Thinker Media IncUsed only with express written permission

Nullius in Verba

We can only hope that members of the powerful scientific establishment, and their minions, with a vested interest in protecting their reputations and the reputations of their award winning members and peer reviewers - alive and deceased - will not delete the facts on Wikipedia, and that if they do that Wikipedian editors will have the moral courage to stand up to them to ensure they do not in 2016 continue their 155 year legacy of corrupting the history of the discovery of natural selection.

We are gifted with a moral sense and It is a pleasure for me to wish Wikipedian editors and Darwinists the pleasure of doing good. Unfortunately, I - like Patrick Matthew before me - can only wish it.

I don't expect the Royal Society will be awarding me in 2016 - or anytime soon - their Darwin Medal for originally discovering and 100 % proving that Darwin was a lying plagiarizing science fraudster by glory theft.

The States of Denial Paradox

We must remain watchful of 'states of denial'. As Cohen (2001) explained, it is a great paradox that such denial protects our state of mind from unbearable truths, yet ultimately it is our greatest threat.

image

Public Domain

Patrick Matthew; The Seer of Gourdiehill

This is what Wikipedian editors added to their page on 1st January 2016 (correct at 13.06 GMT)

Later opinions

Although Darwin insisted he had been unaware of Matthew's work, some modern commentators have held that he and Wallace were likely to have known of it, or could have been influenced indirectly by other naturalists who read and cited Matthew's book.

    • Ronald W. Clark, in his 1984 biography of Darwin, commented that "Only the transparent honesty of Darwin's character... makes it possible to believe that by the 1850s he had no recollection of Matthew's work".[10] This begs the question, for it assumes he did read Matthew's book. Clark continues by suggesting: "If Darwin had any previous knowledge of Arboriculture, it had slipped down into the unconscious".[11][12]
    • The criminologist Mike Sutton' has published research as a paper presented in 2014 to a British Society of Criminology conference proposing that both Darwin and Wallace had "more likely than not committed the world's greatest science fraud by apparently plagiarising the entire theory of natural selection from a book written by Patrick Matthew and then claiming to have no prior knowledge of it."[13] On 28 May 2014 The Daily Telegraph science correspondent reported Sutton's views, and also the opinion of Darwin biographer James Moore that this was a non-issue, and it was doubtful "if there was any new evidence had not been already seen and interpreted in the opposite way."[14] Sutton published a 2014 e-book Nullius in Verba: Darwin's Greatest Secret presenting his argument based on "new Big Data analysis", which he said uniquely shows that contrary to the prior belief that no naturalists had read Matthew's ideas before 1860, seven naturalists cited his 1831 book in the literature, four were well known to Darwin, and three (Loudon, Selby and Chambers) had in his view played major roles influencing and facilitating the pre-1860 work of Darwin and Wallace on natural selection.[15] Sutton's (2014) original research revealed that Loudon was editor of the journal that later published two of Blyth's (1835) [16] and (1836) [17] papers on evolution, and that Selby was editor of the Journal that later published Wallace's (1855) Sarawak paper on evolution.[18] Sutton (2014) [15] claimed that it was significant that Chambers cited Matthew's book in 1832,[19] and went on to write the best selling Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation in 1844.[20]
image

Public Domain

With our actions and our words let's make 2016 the Year of Veracity

THE WORLD DESERVES AN EXPLANATION FOR HOW ON EARTH DARWIN SCHOLARS MISSED OBVIOUS AND SIGNIFICANT FACTS THAT DARWIN LIED ABOUT THE READERSHIP OF MATTHEW'S (1831) BOOK AND THAT THE BOOK - AND THE ORIGINAL IDEAS IN IT ON NATURAL SELECTION - WERE BOTH READ AND CITED BY NATURALISTS KNOWN TO DARWIN AND WALLACE AND THAT IT WAS CENSORED IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE 19th-CENTURY.

I think that Cohen's (2001) scholarship on 'States of Denial' provides considerable and valuable information about how the scholarly atrocity of Darwinist multiple-myth spreading, to corrupt the history of the discovery of natural selection, happened (Here).

Happy New Year Best Thinkers: Stay Vigilant. never allow dysology to flourish. "Fight the States of Denial Spectrum in 2016"

image

Dysology.comAttribution

Mike Sutton's (2015) 'States of Denial Spectrum Hypothesis'.

 
There are currently no comments.
 
 
Latest Thinking in Science
corner
corner
 
 
Latest Ebooks