Plagiarising Science Fraud

Plagiarising Science Fraud
Newly Discovered Facts, Published in Peer Reviewed Science Journals, Mean Charles Darwin is a 100 Per Cent Proven Lying, Plagiarising Science Fraudster by Glory Theft of Patrick Matthew's Prior-Published Conception of the Hypothesis of Macro Evolution by Natural Selection

Friday, 12 August 2016

How to Deal with Internet Trolls: Lesson No.1: Poo baggie their spoor

Various individuals - such as Dr George Beccaloni, curator of the Wallace Collection of the Museum of Natural History London (behind the cockroach pseudonym Megaloblatta) - e.g. here,  and Dr Dagg (behind the pseudonym Joachim D)  have been actively abusing me on the internet and behaving with serial embarrassing dishonesty about the newly discovered facts,  because they are apparently jealous of, and clearly livid at, my discovery of the new data that completely punctures the 155 year old comfy Darwinite myth that no naturalists read Patrick Matthew's (1831) prior-published discovery of the full complex hypothesis of macroevolution by natural slection before Darwin and Wallace replicated it and excused themselves for failing to cite the originator Matthew, with the excuse - which Darwin knew to be lie at the time he first wrote it in 1860 and so every time thereafter  - that no one else had read it before their replications (see Sutton 2016) . In fact, their friends and influencers and influencer's influencers are newly discovered to have read Matthew's (1831) book and the original ideas in it and cited it pre 1858! (see Sutton 2014).

I have asked both Dagg and Beccaloni many times what original discoveries they have made in the field in which they claim to be expert. Apparently the answer is none whatsoever. Which is a very probable explanation for their apparently palpable intense jealousy and embarrassing silliness.

Here is how to deal with such trollish activity. Lesson No. 1: Tell it as it is on the basis of the independently verifiable evidence facts:

Visit the comments section (page 2 of comments) on the Sandwalk blog site to see the source of this screen shot - here:


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. Mike: Since you are supposedly a criminological sleuth who is a master of Google searches (your "big data" analysis method), I had expected you to discover for yourself what my discoveries are! Finding my CV on the Web really isn't difficult ( In fact if you type "George Beccaloni" into Google it will be listed as the first search result. One of my very recent discoveries is the world's first known amphibious centipede which went viral on the Web. Just type "amphibious centipede" into Google. Oh, and there is also my recent 'astonishing' discovery that Matthew was "knowledge contaminated" by his teacher Thomas Hope and stole Hutton's theory of natural selection...

    1. Discovering a new centipede is excellent. Well done George. I enjoyed reading about it.

      But the topic of conversation here is what new discoveries have you made - and published in peer reviewed science, or history of science, scholarly journals or in published books, or even in papers given at academic conferences to come to that, on the topic of the discovery of macro evolution by natural selection (the science norm being to call it natural selection for short - unless otherwises stated)?

      Scientists (biologists - such as Prof Arlin Stoltzfus for example ) are now promoting in public the veracity of my peer reviewed discoveries and their significance. The psychologist Professor Mark Griffiths is interested in the fact denial cognitive dissonance and dishonest behaviour of Darwinists in this regard as well:

      Griffiths writes on Dr Mike Weale's Patrick Matthew Project site:

      Anyone questioning the significance of what Dr Mike Sutton has uncovered in his research – or who denying that the facts that Dr. Sutton found using his Internet Date-Detection method even exist – might like to visit my blog on the the topic. Here:


Spam will be immediately deleted. Other comments warmly welcome.

On this blogsite you are free to write what you think in any way you wish to write it. However, please bear in mind it is a published public environment. Those who seek to hide behind pseudonyms may be exposed for who they actually are.

Anyone publishing threats, obscene comments or anything falling within the UK Anti-Harassment and the Obscene Communications Acts (which carry a maximum sentence of significant periods of imprisonment) should realise Google blogs capture the IP addresses of those who post comments. From there, it is a simple matter to know who you are, where you are commenting from, reveal your identity and inform the appropriate police services.