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  

Darwin Worshippers Demand Special Privileges for their Namesake

Mar. 1, 2016 6:10 am
image

Public Domain

Foxglove: Source of the powerful heart medicine Digitalis

Did you know that it is a fact that the much loved Erasmus Darwin (FRS) Famous Fellow of the Royal Society and Grandfather of Charles Darwin was outed and shamed for his 'dishonest glory theft' plagiarism of the discovery of the powerful heart medicine digitalis?

So even famous and much loved powerful members of the scientific elite are proven plagiarists. That is a fact of life.

image

Public Domain

Erasmus Darwin. Grandfather of Charles Darwin

Why then, in the case of Charles Darwin (FRS), do Darwin scholars (Darwinists) deny this same fact of proven lying plagiarising glory theft? They are currently denying the facts in the teeth of the 100 per cent independently verifiable peer reviewed evidence (Sutton 2014) that, just like his famous grandfather before him, the famous Charles Darwin was also a dishonest plagiarising science fraudster.

Are Darwin scholars not genuine and objective skeptics?

Clearly, obviously and significantly, the facts of what he was told by Matthew in 1860 and the facts of what Charles Darwin then wrote in 1860 and from 1861 onwards to the self-serving (and Matthew glory robbing) benefit of himself were lies. They were lies as we all commonly identify lies. Why then do Darwin scholars award Darwin extra-special status (above and beyond all other human beings) as a non-liar when he is proven to be a serial liar?

Gonzo Criminology: Engaging with the wider public on the proof of Darwin's lies

This week, the national British newspaper, the Telegraph, in a blog post entitled: 'Charles Darwin was no 'heroic genius', say scientists', covered the conclusions of a research paper published by Dr Michael Muthukrishna, and Professor Joseph Henrich that claims "collective intelligence" - as opposed to individual brilliance - particularly characterises great breakthroughs in thought and discovery. Personally, I think the authors overstate the commonsense fact that every great leap making discovery genius builds upon the foundations of prior knowledge. Besides, the authors, themselves, failed to tap into the so-called collective intelligence of the published literature that acknowledges Patrick Matthew originated the notion of macro evolution by natural selection and took it forward in a book (Matthew 1831), published by major Edinburgh and London publishers at a time when such ideas were deemed seditious and heretical (see: Sutton 2014).

Whatever the case, the Telegraph journalist Tom Morgan informs us:

Dr Muthukrishna explains: “To be an innovator, it’s better to be social rather than smart. There’s no doubt that there are variations in people’s raw skills, but what predicts the difference between a Steve Jobs and a Joe Bloggs is actually their exposure to new ideas that are wonderful and different.

“If you want to be more creative the best thing you can do is to talk to people who disagree with you.”

Taking up Dr Muthukrishna's advice I (in the guise of 'Supermythbuster'), and Howard Minnick - third great grandson of Patrick Matthew (in the guise of 'wheresstockton') engaged in some Gonzocriminology by putting ourselves in the story, becoming part of the story and then reporting on the story.

One character we encountered, who goes by the moniker 'Wittgensteinsfoot', responded - to the evidence in the historic publication record, which I presented for the proof that Darwin lied about the readership of Matthew's book - with the following conclusion:

'You may be right in detail but I very much doubt that Darwin was the sort of man who would perpetuate a known act of plagiarism. Many, including Darwin's grandfather postulated or skirted the idea of NS but Darwin was the only one who deduced NS as a consequence of detailed physiological study. Anyway, who cares?'

Having read the detail of the irrefutable publication record that proves Darwin a liar - a fact that I originally spotted and shared with the world in my (Sutton 2014) book Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret, Wittgensteinsfoot sought to deny the irrefutable newly discovered and independently verifiable facts by adopting the exact same wilfully ignorant pseudo-scholarly Semmelweis-reflex anti-reasoning of Darwin's biographer James Moore in an earlier Telegraph blog (Knaption 2014) article on my original discoveries. Wittgensteinsfoot:

'If this were the case, I.e. conscious plagiarism by Darwin and others, I'm pretty certain that someone of scientific repute (no offence intended) would have revealed the whole thing with meticulous research to back up the assertion. TV programmes would follow. ..'

In my mere opinion, it is this kind of gumption-deficient and bone-headed intellectually idle - if it was true we would have learned it as truth from someone more expert than you - 'state of denial' blindsight to the 100 per cent obvious and significant proven great dishonesty of Darwin, and also of many more who are lauded by the general public, that leads some people to become as irrational in seeking to explain it as those who are irrational in their denial of it. Why else, for example, does David Icke's cult think I have proven Darwin is a giant shape shifting alien lizard who somehow hypnotized the world?

Conclusion

The travesty is that, having been successfully punterized by the newly proven lies (Sutton 2014) of Darwin and his adoring Darwinists into believing Patrick Matthew is irrelevant, the Scots demolished his Gourdie Hill house in the Carse of Gowrie and grubbed-up the remains of his orchards in the 1980's . Still punterized, today they are now cutting down the monumental giant redwood trees he planted.

image

Used only with express written permission

Gourdie Hill, in the Carse of Gowrie. Seat of Patrick Matthew Esq.


Those cannily denying the significance of the newly discovered facts that suggest Matthew more than likely did influence both Darwin and Wallace through some kind of 'knowledge contamination' are part of that same Scottish, and wider science history, cultural vandalism problem.

The sooner the facts of Darwin's and Wallace's proven lies are accepted as lies the better for Scottish historical sustainability.

image

Dysology.com and PatrickMatthew.comAttribution

Join the Veracity Revolution. Blame it on Google and Follow Supermythbuster on Twitter

You can follow me as "Supermythbuster" on Twitter

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