Thursday, 20 April 2017
Tuesday, 18 April 2017
Saturday, 15 April 2017
Saturday, 8 April 2017
Tuesday, 4 April 2017
Claimed Multiple Coincidence conundrum: Criminology, science statistics - All have no answer to this big problem: https://t.co/4l0O1CAxiQ— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) April 4, 2017
Monday, 3 April 2017
Thursday, 23 March 2017
Friday, 17 March 2017
Wednesday, 15 March 2017
Saturday, 11 March 2017
Thursday, 9 March 2017
Wednesday, 8 March 2017
What about the rules of Darwin worship in science. I broke those with cold hard newly discovered facts that bust the paradigm of Darwin and Wallace as independent discoverers of an unread prior-published theory see: Sutton 2014 and Sutton 2016.
Were you to nominate my paradigm changing orignal research discoveries for any prize in science what outcome should we expect? Why?
++Evolution trial: Darwin vs Sutton. Please make your bets... https://t.co/Yqsn8nm9gH— Emilio Cervantes (@BiologiaPensamt) March 7, 2017
Sunday, 5 March 2017
+.@JohnParker1988 They could be on the rise. Only now visualized in the mind of credulous and biased pseudo-skeptics? https://t.co/98unybjgbO pic.twitter.com/VTWprCl8nW— Dr Mike Sutton (@Criminotweet) March 5, 2017
Saturday, 4 March 2017
Monday, 27 February 2017
Wednesday, 22 February 2017
Tuesday, 21 February 2017
Monday, 20 February 2017
Ignoring completely the accepted Arago Ruling on first and foremost priority for a discovery going to whoever had their original discovery published first, the Royal Society awarded the Darwin medal, and its most prestigious Copley medal, to Wallace. Why? For replicating Matthew's (1831) prior-published theory in 1858 and for claiming it as his own. If that was not a corrupt act by the Royal Society then what is?
No one is ever going to win the Royal Society's Copley Medal now - never mind one of its Darwin Medals - for originally proving Matthew's book, containing the full theory of natural selection, was read and cited by Darwin's and Wallace's friends, influencers and editors and their influencer's influencers before Darwin and Wallace replicated Matthew's original conception and claimed to have done so independently of it. Just Google "On Knowledge Contamination" (put it in those speech quotes - its a simple Big Data trick) to find the peer reviewed truth of what has been discovered on this topic.
How can we ask the scientific community to stand up to Trump's anti-vaccination and anti-global warming claptrap when its most esteemed institution is corrupt?
In 1860, 157 years ago, Matthew wrote two letters - both published in the Gardener's Chronicle of that year - claiming his priority.
Darwin wrote to admit Matthew got the entire thing first - 27 years in published print (in 1831) before he and Wallace replicated the theory in their papers presented before the Linnean Society n 1858. Yet Darwin continued to call it "my theory" and lied by claiming no naturalist/no one at all had read Matthew's original ideas. Darwin wrote those falsehoods even though Matthew had prior- informed him of two naturists who did read his ideas pre-1858.
We know knewly know (Google 'Nullius in verba Darwin's greatest secret' to get the facts) that many of Darwin's and Wallace's friends, associates and influencers cited Matthew's book and mentioned his orignal ideas pre-1858 in published print. Selby - the editor of Wallace's 1855 Sarawak paper cited Matthew's 1831 book in 1842. Chambers' - Wallace's greatest influencer and Darwin's associate and Correspondent pre-1858 (he authored the Vestiges of Creation in 1844) cited Matthew's book in 1832. there are many more I could mention.
Nevertheless - even despite what has been newly discovered about Matthew's prior-influence- the Arago Ruling was ignored by The Royal Society.
Before we can take on the likes of Donald Trump's tweets that vaccinations cause autism and global warming is a Chinese conspiracy (here), our esteemed institutions of science must first put themselves in order. We need an inquiry into the corruption that is the so-called Darwin Industry.
Sunday, 19 February 2017
@Criminotweet Looks like the v small book was a publisher's compression of other stuff. Not so much corrupt as lazy and dumb, I suspect— Brian Deer (@deerbrian) February 19, 2017
Saturday, 18 February 2017
Friday, 17 February 2017
Sunday, 12 February 2017
++Happy Darwin Day SUCKERS!— BlessedVirginDarwin (@OnNavalTimber) February 12, 2017
2: https://t.co/DotiWqaMkbhttps://t.co/xBGGof5eY7#Darwin #PatrickMatthew pic.twitter.com/lj7s35Dwc4
And to raise questions about research integrity. https://t.co/yksOVd2tEX— Robert Dingwall (@rwjdingwall) February 12, 2017