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

Tuesday, 29 November 2016

Hypocrisy and delusional Darwinite thinking

Monday, 28 November 2016

Data is the revolution that replaced lies and silly stories

Thursday, 24 November 2016

The truth always gets out there in the end




++



There is an alternative vision for the future. It's one based upon veracity not  fact-denial, pseudo scholarship and political claptrap.

Tuesday, 22 November 2016

Survival of the fittest

Saturday, 19 November 2016

Merry Christmas Darwinites

























  • The perfect stocking filler for Darwin miracle fans is:available on Amazon Here   
  • Browse some of the book's highlights Here    
  • Listen to an interview with the author Here    
  • Read an expert peer-reviewed scholarly science journal article on some of the findings Here   
image






Friday, 18 November 2016

Those Who Harass and Facilitate the Harassment of Paradigm Changing Discoverers and Immortal Great Thinkers will be Exposed and Shamed for All Eternity

"A leading psychologist whose research on human memory exposed her to death threats, lawsuits, personal abuse and a campaign to have her sacked has won a prestigious prize for her courage in standing up for science." 

                                                         

                                                      Read her story: Here


What we do in this life echoes through eternity



++

My own story so far - well just some of it. The rest is far worse and, rest assured, it will be published in the future.

Read just some of the facts of the professional harassment and abuse I have been on the receiving end of  here

Here are the published facts some really don't like: 




1. Nullius in Verba: Darwin's Greatest Secret

2. On Knowledge Contamination 

Wednesday, 16 November 2016

Monday, 14 November 2016

More Wiki Stupidity

Sunday, 13 November 2016

Comments Section of: "No Fuller than Complete: Darwin’s Age Comes to an End", by Gregory Sandstrom


The truth will always out in the end. But not before disgracefully fraudulent, fact denying and fact deleting Darwinitis have spree-shot themsleves in the butt-tocks for all eternity. 

My comment in conversation with Gregory Sandstrom: 

Your comment will appear after being approved.
Etymology re Matthew and Darwin is correct now Gregory.
The “too bad Matthew never knew what he had” argument is a popular Darwinite “guilt neutralization by proxy” tactic that is rather similar to con-man thieves who say of their victim “poor sucker never knew what he had”.
In fact, the evidence suggests Matthew knew exactly what he conceived and so did others many years pre-1858. The evidence he knew what he had is that others did in the first half of the 19th century, and they communicated with hm about it. For example, in Matthew’s second 1860 letter to the Gardener’s Chronicle. he plainly informed Darwin (1) That a professor naturalist of an eminent university read and understood fully what Matthew conceived and yet was afraid to teach it to his students, or mention it elsewhere, for fear of pillory punishment. (2) That for the same reason (Matthew’s scientific trespass on natural divinity) his book was banned for being heretical by the public lending library of Perth in Scotland (Matthew called it by its nick-name "the Fair City"). All these details are fully cited in my peer reviewed 2016 article “On Knowledge contamination: New Data Challenges Claims of Darwin’s and Wallace’s Independent Conceptions of Matthew’s Prior-Published Hypothesis” Here: http://www.nauka-a-religia.uz.zgora.pl/index.php/pl/czasopismo/46-fag-2015/921-fag-2015-art-05.
For the very same reasons of fear of being prosecuted and persecuted for heresy Robert Chambers (who cited Matthew’s book in 1832) anonymously authored the best selling “Vestiges of Creation” – the book which put evolution in the air and paved the way for public acceptance of Darwin’s (1859) ‘Origin of Species'.
Moreover, other reviewers also knew the heresy of Matthew’s bombshell origination as early as 1831. The following text is from 1831 the anonymous review of Matthew’s 1831 book by the United Services Journal :
“But we disclaim participation in his ruminations on the law of Nature or on the outrages committed upon reason and justice by our burthens of hereditary nobility entailed property and insane enactments.”
An agenda Wikipedia editor operating under the name “Dave Souza” on the Patrick Matthew page keeps deleting the citation to the source of above fact under the fraudulent claim that it does not exist! Proof it does exist in the publication record, and proof of the desperate lengths Darwinians are going to to delete the New Data facts can be found here: https://www.bestthinking.com/thinkers/science/social_sciences/sociology/mike-sutton?tab=blog&blogpostid=23792,23792. Yet Wikipedia will not allow anyone to enter that fact on its Patrick Matthew page. In this way the greatest science fraud in history continues.
Darwinists will go to any length to hide the facts. I have many more examples.
Mike


Errol Jones

Veracity Counter Culture and Weird and Wonderful Blogs on Darwin's Plagiarising Science Fraud

++ +++

Saturday, 12 November 2016

Confirmatory Evidence for the Frozen Donkey Hypothesis

Darwinians were warned that if they continued to behave irrationally to the new data facts that the Frozen Donkey Hypothesis would be confirmed.

The Frozen Donkey Hypothesis is born of the implications of the obvious catastrophic extinction event impact of the New Data on Darwinist professional and amateur historians of science, who reveal by their plainly biased response to it, that they are necessarily concerned – if they are to remain so named Darwinists and not be re-born Matthewists – with ignoring the rational implications of the new disconfirming hard evidence for their prior soft knowledge beliefs in their namesake’s “independent” discovery of a prior published hypothesis that was read, and the book containing it cited, by naturalists who were Darwin’s admitted influencers and associates and correspondents- even though Darwin himself fallaciously wrote in 1860 that no naturalist known to him had read it.

See more on the hypothesis here. 
See more on the New Data - here.

Charles Darwin and the Daleks

Tuesday, 8 November 2016

Excellent Research Resource Repository

 Here you will find a number of peer reviewed articles that examine the question of Darwin's originality and science fraud by plagiarism : https://core.ac.uk/display/30649866

A truly excellent resource!

Monday, 7 November 2016

Desperate Darwinite Fairy Tale Telling and Shameless Fact Deletion

++

Friday, 4 November 2016

More on Robert Chambers


In my book "Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret" I originally
revealed the New Data that bust the 155 year old expert 'knowledge claim' that no naturalist and no one known to Darwin read Matthew's (1831) prior-published original hypothesis of macroevolution by natural selection before Darwin and Wallace replicated it and failed to cite Matthew. Darwin excused that failure by claiming he independently conceived it and that no naturalist, and no one at all read Matthew's original ideas before 1860.

Darwin lied, because Matthew had informed him in 1860 that two naturalists had read his ideas and that his book was banned by Perth Library for its heresy on the origin of species. In reality, Nullius reveals 25 people cited Matthew pre-Darwin's and Wallace's replications of 1858, four were known to Darwin, he was influenced by three of them and one was the editor of Wallace's famous 1855 Sarawak paper on evolution. One was Robert Loudon - who edited two of Blyth's influential pre-1858 papers on natural selection. Blyth was Darwin's most prolific correspondent and informant. Loudon was a close friend of William Hooker - the father of Darwin's best friend, the highly influential botanist Joseph Hooker. Loudon had written in 1832 that Matthew appeared to have something orignal to say "on the origin of species" no less! Another naturalist who read and cited Matthew's book pre-1858 was Robert Chambers. He did so in 1832, and in the following decade went on to write The Vestiges of Creation - the book that "put evolution in the air" in the mid 19th century, and greatly influenced both Darwin and Wallace and paved the way for public acceptance of Darwin's (1859) book entitled the Origin of Species.












++

Thursday, 3 November 2016

Creationists fear Matthew and are fact denying about his origination of macroevolution by natural selection




Origin of the term Darwinist

Wednesday, 2 November 2016

Applied Criminology

+++ ++

Tuesday, 1 November 2016

One Stupid Scholarly "Expert" at a Time

Kuhn was right about resistance to paradigm changing discoveries